Thursday, February 6, 2014

ND Pizzorno's Foreword to ND Catanzaro's 2004 Oncology Book

here, I cite from and comment upon the ND Pizzorno authored foreword to "Cancer: An Integrative Approach" (2004, ISBN 159214991) written by ND Catanzaro:

[Yes, the same ND Catanzaro who recently had his licensed suspended for "duping' cancer patients, or as some title it "misleading" patients by way of an "an unapproved experimental vaccine."  I just got the book cheaply used, baked it to melt the binding glue, pulled it apart, trimmed it all, fed it through the scanner, ocr'd it, and now I can search it easily as a PDF.  The foreword is written by ND Pizzorno, 'old science-based Joe'.  So, I thought I'd bounce the language of the foreword against the contents of the book, briefly.  One thing I must mention about the book's perspective, it is DEEPLY Christian.  Incidences: god= 218, christ = 52, spirit = 105, soul = 48, pray = 55.  I actually find that to not be very common in naturopathyland.  ND stuff is usually diffusely New Age.  So, if there is a patina of Christian apologetics in some of my quotes, it is not my perspective but that of the source.  The book was recommended by the ND on a recent post at his web site.]

001. the foreword [my comments are in unquoted bold]:

it is signed "Joseph E. Pizzorno, ND. President Emeritus, Bastyr University. Co-Author Textbook of Natural Medicine [whom I'll term OSBJ]."

that is ND Catanzaro's alma mater.  The current president of Bastyr is PhD Church who continues the Pizzorno-Bastyr tradition of lauding naturopathy as "science-based" including naturopathy's supernaturalism.  Well, at least that tradition is intact, for anyone who was worrying!  And he is THE ND Pizzorno who tells us in his book "Total Wellness" that naturopathy's essential premise of "life force" is "spirit", which I'll get back to because his language communicating that premise in this foreword is not-so-transparent.

OSBJ: "Dr. Catanzaro's informative, authoritative, and carefully researched book is a perfect resource for those intending to, not only survive cancer, but thrive in their health."


ND Catanzaro: "acceptance of ayurveda as medicine and science is safe as long as the religious philosophy is not embraced [...] acceptance of traditional Chinese medicine as medicine and science is safe as long as the religious philosophy is not embraced."

fascinating, what I'll call attempted 'epistemic distinction': delineating science and religion / belief.  Yet, ayurveda and TCM are prescientific.  And I've quite-often written that naturopathy's core is quite 'the belief system' / religiosity.  So, ND Catanzaro's "science" label upon the prescientific is wrong, though I agree with the fact that both systems have aspects of their culture's dominant religions, Hinduism and Chinese folk religions.  For example, in terms of contents that are science-exterior, and in my view not SAFE for science [!], ND Catanzaro writes: "ayurveda [...] focuses on establishing and maintaining balance of the life energies within us [...] three fundamental universal energies that regulate all natural processes  [...] the tridosha [...] traditional Chinese medicine [...] qi [...] is often translated as vital force, or vital energy, or life force [...] by inserting fine needles into the body, the TCM doctor can affect the flow of qi [...] diverting the flow [...] to organs or areas of the body where there is a deficiency or away from areas where there is excess."  It is QUITE WRONG, OSBJ, to call ND Catanzaro's mislabeling of prescientific stuff like that just quoted vitalism "informative, authoritative, and carefully researched."   But, this is naturopathy, where values are SO reversed.

OSBJ: "the time has come for us as a nation and as individuals to start thinking fundamentally differently."

oh I think we're doing that all right: the abject nonscience mislabeled science.  Quite out-of-the-box!

OSBJ: "here are the ten principles we derived to guide us in our visioning of an optimal health care system."

ten shall be the number, he has decreed.  Some of these are coded versions of naturopathy's defining principles.

OSBJ: "1. a wholeness orientation [...] mind, body, spirit, and environment [...] the whole person."

so, there's naturopathy's supernaturalism kind.  Is it "optimal" to falsely label such "science-based"?

OSBJ: "2. evidence of safety and efficacy: the scientific method must be appropriately applied to identify safe and effective CAM services and products and to generate the evidence that will protect and promote the public health [...] every intervention and recommendation must be subjected to rigorous scientific evaluation."

I'm all for that.  And when you do that to 'the essentially naturopathic', "rigorous scientific evaluation", you quite quickly find that naturopathy's ideas are science-exterior like supernaturalism-vitalism, and methods are science-exteior, like homeopathy.  There are 31 instances of the root 'homeo' in this book, by the way.  ND Catanzaro tells us "there are no superstitious roots in homeopathy and the fundamental laws of nature are respected" [right!].  And he speaks of treating patients with an "autologous homeopathic vaccine [...] made from the patient's blood."

OSBJ: "3. the healing capacity of the person: each person has a remarkable capacity for recovery and self-healing, and a major focus of health care is to support and promote this capacity."

and here's where things get HIGHLY coded.  This is that "life force" or "qi" or 'dosha' belief, buried in naturalistic language, that we don't deserve to know about in a transparent manner, according to OSBJ.

OSBJ: "9. dissemination of comprehensive and timely information: the quality of health care can be enhanced by promoting efforts that thoroughly and thoughtfully examine the evidence on which CAM systems, practices, and products are based and by making this evidence widely, rapidly, and easily available [...] integrated medicine includes the full participation of the patient and honest commitment to validity and accountability [...] the patient must be informed [...] 8. education as a fundamental health care service: education about prevention, healthful lifestyles, and the power of self-healing [coding!] should be made an integral part of the curricula of all health care professionals and should be made available to the public at all ages."

ironic that a guy coding what the essentially naturopathic is thinks education, thoroughness and thoughtfulness are so important while HIS Bastyr U. miseducates galore that things like "spirit", homeopathy and vitalism are science-based.  Those things, and so much more within naturopathy like craniosacral therapy, are truly scientifically invalid when one IS honest.

OSBJ: "conventional treatment does virtually nothing to reverse the underlying causes that lead to cancer. Into this grim picture comes the promise of natural medicine: herbs, nutrients, and lifestyle interventions, which help correct the underlying causes."

and here we go with the 'naturopathy has the answer, conventional medicine doesn't' posture which makes people worry, a worry that naturopathy then alleviates through naturopathic commerce, that then I term racketeering because that is a fake crisis.

OSBJ: "wishful thinking does not help anyone."

now, here's where it all gets too funny to stay conscious!  This book is FILLED with "wishful thinking."  There's prayer: with 'pray' happening at least 55 times, being that ND Catanzaro is QUITE Christian throughout.  He states such things as: "there is need for a new type of physician, one who allows the supernatural force of god to work the miracle and to be the vehicle that can facilitate this healing power. This will involve the expenditure of soul and spiritual energy and greater faith, trust, prayer, and commitment to god."  Sounds wishful to me!  And let me make it clear that I'm not refuting someone's right to do such / mocking, I'm just merely pointing out inconsistencies between the contents of the foreword and the body of the book.

Overall note: by the way, the word "demonic" occurs in the book at least 6 times, with ND Catanzaro stating such things as:

"we still live in a fallen world where demonic forces exist [...] illness can have a demonic source."

but my question is: how demonic is it to visit 'naturopathic oncology' upon the public, wherein labels are so twisted around in terms of what they actually are labeling that it's like watching her head spin around and around in the Exorcist? 

out, naturopathic devils!
Post a Comment