001. Glidden, P. (ND Bastyr 1991) states in "The Differences Between MD's and ND's? Is Naturopathy Science Based? [...]" [vsc 2013-05-10; my comments are in unquoted bold]:
#supplements #scienceclaim #efficacyclaim #theisticsoulforce #vitalism #spiritism #antievolution #professionsclaim.
"[from the description] naturopathic medicine is science based and clinically verified. Naturopathic medicine exists to marry the scientific method with non-drug therapeutics [...]";
the typical science-based and clinical efficacy claim, the usual anti-pharma thing all ironically on a video page that promotes an "online marketing" supplement business aka big supplement!
"the philosophy of ND's is that the human body gets sick because of deficiencies but can heal itself [...] we believe that when the human body is given the raw materials needed it knows how and wants to heal itself [...]";
the overstated typical claim that healing is unlimited / dietary. But, there are so FEW diseases due to deficiency in developed countries! Unless your are selling supplements, wink-wink.
"[...from the video, ND Glidden directly] naturopathic medicine is science-based and clinically verified [...] everything that we do, well, the majority of the therapeutics that naturopathic doctors recommend for their patients or their clients are science-based and clinically verified. That's why my profession exists [...] my profession exists in order to marry the scientific method with non-drug therapeutics [...] to say that naturopathic medicine is not science-based is just a lie quite frankly. It's just a lie [...] everything that we do is science-based and clinically verified and to say anything to the contrary is a bald-faced lie [...]";
directly from the ND: the professional claim, the science claim and then the rather inflammatory accusation that criticism is a lie. But, its so easy to debunk the science subset naturopathy claim that to state that abject nonscience / 'the essentially naturopathic' is science like here in the video is simply bizarre. And oh how crazy naturopathy is.
"there is a fundamental point of departure in the philosophy of holistic medicine which naturopathic doctors and chiropractors and homeopaths and acupuncturists and ayurvedic practitioners and traditional Chinese medical practitioners are trained in [...]";
ah, 'the holistic.' I've never known a specific definition of holistic. It's kind of like the word widget. Obviously, what's listed as holistic are sectarian prescientific medical systems. So, they must have something in common.
"this is a holistic method. And MDs are trained in a reductionistic method. These two philosophies of healing are diametrically opposed from the beginning. They are 180 degrees opposite each other. Reductionism argues that if it can't be measured it doesn't exist [...] this whole domain of measurable versus the unmeasurable [...] to the reductionist, to the MD, to the psychiatrist, consciousness is a function of biochemistry [...] your MD is trained to believe that consciousness stops when the body stops, that consciousness is created by biochemicals [...]";
there we go, a supposed difference: measurement versus nonmeasurement. But, the ND doesn't know much about the terms he's using, apparently. If it can be measured, it is proper to call that area or phenomenon 'empirically verifiable' or scientifically testable. Reductionism is something else, actually, and I think he's railing against materialism but unaware of the term [or not using it here, anyway]. Reductionism is a form of analysis wherein investigation of the components of a phenomena end up explaining the phenomena [roughly, as I see it, presently!. E.g. the human organism is explainable based upon biology subset physiology etc.]. Science itself isn't merely reductionistic anyway. For instance, the study of global warming geothermodynamics etc. is quite 'complex systems based'. So, apparently, holistic means immeasurable but claimed to exist, which isn't, for me, a very good basis for something as important as medicine [maybe religion, if you are into that]. And we KNOW that the mind is the brain functioning / a function of all that wet chemistry and neuronal complexity.
"[ND Glidden then claims MDs claim that] the human body is a coincidental amalgamation of biochemicals that happened in some antediluvian primordial swamp stimulated by a bolt of lightening from a cloud passing overhead and then evolution kicked in. And it's nonsense [...] the MDs think it was just a biochemical coincidence. Some happenstance of evolution. Now you are you going to believe? [...]";
so now we have antievolutionism and apparently pro-creationism! And, properly, an overarching antibiology. It is quite scientifically correct to say that human beings are the culmination of an evolutionary process spanning a huge amount of time and that that explanation isn't nonsense. It's actually the explanation that makes biology coherent. Why the ND paints the MDs as the 'nonholistic evolutionists anticreationists' is rather strange. He's actually attacking modern thought and scientific consensus based upon what is measurable. Who am I going to believe? For medicine, I prefer scientists who argue a good point, and people who actually know what they're talking about because they are experts in the field...which an ND isn't. This is where I begin to feel PREACHED to by a quite fringe sentiment! I think the choice of the word "believe" is very important, because without measurement / evidence, we 'believe'. He wants something to 'believe' in -- the holistic -- not to factually know through science, perhaps.
"whatever it is that organizes all of the millions and trillions of biochemical automatic biochemical processes in the human body every second of every day from our point of view [and he points at himself] this is the vital force. It's what keeps things running. Now, can you measure it objectively, no. Does that mean it doesn't exist, no. This is the fundamental point of departure. Holistic physicians are trained to believe that the human body is endowed with a God-given soul-force and it is the soul-force which made your body grow itself, gave your body the intelligence to grow itself all by itself from a single-celled organism into the magnificent manifestation of you [...]";
and there we go, that amalgamation of theism, spiritism, and vitalism aka 'the holistic'. I've termed this fundamental naturopathic belief "vital force spirit" aka vfs. All science-ejected in the sense that biology doesn't need any of those things to explain ANYTHING. Now, we were promised that naturopathy is "science based" earlier. This puts us in that odd place I call the naturopathillogical: science subset nonscience.
"what my profession is grounded in, that when you give the body the proper raw materials your blood pressure gets better, your type II diabetes gets better, your arthritis gets better, your pregnancies start to happen [...] we have evidence to all of these points [...] my profession, in the United States, we're licensed and regulated [...] and it's all covered by insurance [...]";
I term naturopathy a licensed falsehood, and what profession is based upon falsehood? Naturopathy is quite a racket: get a licensure law to practice falsely labeled nonsense and self-regulate your nonsense. I pick the word racket here deliberately: the creation of a false crisis that a unique solution is provided for by the false crisis creator. What does naturopathy do, specifically? In one version, it falsely claims a huge 'malnutrition' epidemic is causing chronic diseases that their supplements will dramatically reverse.
"lets talk about snake-oil [...] gets my blood boiling when I hear MDs accuse my profession of selling snake oil because the only people that are doing that in industrialized nations now have MD after their name [...]";
let me talk about what gets MY blood boiling: naturopathy's racket. I went to naturopathy school, the same kind of school that ND Glidden went to, for four years. And they are untouchable in terms of getting consumer protective actions rolling against them in spite of the fact that they claim to be something they are not: nonsectarian science when actually containing the science-ejected and requiring a sectarian oath towards claiming it all as legitimate science. Talk about snake oil. I really don't care for defending regular medicine: I am not a physician and naturopathy's claims must stand or fall upon their own merit. I do care for rigorous scientific standards, and that's something naturopathy is the opposite of.
002. ND Glidden writes in "The MD Emperor Has No Clothes: Everybody Is Sick and I Know Why" (2012; ASIN B0099ZYTD6; this text below is part of the sample view):
"I am a licensed naturopathic physician [...] I received [...] a naturopathic medical degree (ND) from Bastyr University of Naturopathic Medicine in 1991 [...] naturopathic physicians are trained in science based, clinically verified, safe, effective and affordable wholistic medical treatments such as clinical nutrition, homeopathy, herbal medicine, bio-identical hormone balancing, acupuncture, and detoxification programs [...] a full-fledged, licensed and regulated primary care medical discipline [...] naturopathic medical treatments [...] stimulate the body's built-in self healing mechanisms [coded vitalism...and] help people completely recover from whatever illness they have been suffering from [...] the conditions listed above were completely eliminated through the application of naturopathic treatments [...] the Down's syndrome case is interesting, don't you think? [...] this is just the tip of the naturopathic iceberg called 'cure' [...] the medical philosophy that MDs are trained in is referred to as 'allopathy' [...] coined by German physician [...] Hahnemann in the 19th century [...which is] atheistic, reductionistic and oppositionally-defiant in its philosophy of treatment [...] it does not believe in the existence of the human soul, or for that matter, anything metaphysical [...] the exclusion of the soul is one of the most startling aspects of allopathic medical thinking [...] the wholistic practitioners are right, the MDs are wrong";
so, essentially, the same argument that science should contain that which isn't science like the theistic and supernatural, and a bullying opinion of what's right without facts to back it up.
003. naturopathy as a reversal of values:
so, I term naturopathy "a reversal of values", wherein:
professionalism is a falsehood racket,
science is abjectly science-exterior,
what's a fact is a lie,
snake oil is science,
science contains theistic soul forces,
and it goes on and on.