here, a letter I submitted to the editor of the Portland Tribune 2015-07-22:
"That Which is Not Looked at
Closely."
In the recent article "Naturopathic Mix Traditional, Modern Treatements" -- such ungrammatical and misspelled
craftsmanship -- naturopathy was discussed quite
shallowly and solely promotionally. We're told: "there’s an alternative to the
traditional practice of medicine that we grew up with [...] an
alternative that’s very popular in this part of the country." Yes, naturopathy is so familiar, like a
family member or friend whose deficiencies we cannot admit, a Holy
Cow that can do no wrong. So, proponents and fans shallowly gloss
over the details, as even the verbiage and spelling of the title of
the article illustrates. The article speaks of: "Dr. Martin Milner […] his
clinic is […] credentialed by the Oregon Health Authority to
deliver primary care [...who says] 'we’re trained in natural
therapeutics, diet, exercise, stress management, mental health,
dietary supplements, herbal medicine, homeopathic medicine and
prescription drug management' [...and there's]
Dr. Tom Messinger [...another] licensed naturopathic doctor [...who tells us] naturopathic medicine is evidence based [...] 'our treatment guidelines are based on research and what has been shown to be helpful.'" And there is not a speck of analysis anywhere to be found in the article. For instance, homeopathy is bunk. Yet, we're told it has shown efficacy. And that Oregon.gov credentialing, take a look! At Oregon.gov, we're told in "Board of Naturopathic Medicine": "[naturopathy's] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force." Now, that is a science-ejected idea. Yet we're also told there that naturopathy is "based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and [...] continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis." Is this not the height of absurdity? Like Naked Emperors and such.
Dr. Tom Messinger [...another] licensed naturopathic doctor [...who tells us] naturopathic medicine is evidence based [...] 'our treatment guidelines are based on research and what has been shown to be helpful.'" And there is not a speck of analysis anywhere to be found in the article. For instance, homeopathy is bunk. Yet, we're told it has shown efficacy. And that Oregon.gov credentialing, take a look! At Oregon.gov, we're told in "Board of Naturopathic Medicine": "[naturopathy's] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force." Now, that is a science-ejected idea. Yet we're also told there that naturopathy is "based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and [...] continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis." Is this not the height of absurdity? Like Naked Emperors and such.
-Rob Cullen Author and Host, The Naturocrit Podcast and Blog.
[here's the title screen captured:
here's their fixed title:
No comments:
Post a Comment