[Mission emphasis: I do this continuous exercise to expose the inherent fraud that naturopathy is logically, academically, commercially, legislatively / politically and clinically. Hugely misleading category labels such as "science based" and "evidence based" "nonsectarian" are being placed upon what truly is science-exterior and even more so disproven sectarian / quack nonsense! Then, the largest of betrayals toward the public occurs with highly orchestrated '.gov' endorsements of naturopaths as "licensed" and "professional." Beware, the naturopathic licensed falsehood racket marches on!]
the vitalism [science-ejected subset naturopathy] claims of:
NDs Gignac, Smith, Worts;
NDs Grewal, Jackson, Miller, Roberts, Stokes;
NDs Grieder, Mann;
the 'science subset naturopathy' category claims of:
NDs Cooper, Flattery;
to Appendix I.05.c.;
to Appendix I.05.g.;
NDs Nortman, Ormerod;
to Appendix I.05.L.;
to Appendix I.05.n.;
'the scientific rejection of the supernatural':
the Geological Society of America;
the Science Teachers Association of Texas;
to Appendix CC.;
to Appendix G.05.d.;
to Appendix G.;
Roberts, M. (ND CCNM):
002.a. states, in "Is Naturopathic Medicine Based on Science?"(2015)[saved 2015-08-14]:
"[descr.] Dr. Melina Roberts answers the question 'is naturopathic medicine based on science?' [...from the video] Dr. Melina Roberts, ND. Science vs. Naturopathic Medicine? [...she asks] is naturopathic medicine based on science? Many critics claim that naturopathic medicine is not grounded in science [...] naturopathic medicine is the original medicine [...] it has held the test of time [...] whereas allopathic medicine has been around for maybe 100 years [...] our education as naturopathic doctors is heavily grounded in science. We learn the same basic sciences and diagnostic sciences as conventional doctors [...] most of our treatments are supported by solid research [...] there's a wealth of research [...] showing scientific basis and validity for naturopathic protocols [...] what we do is science-based and increasingly evidence based [...] the beauty of naturopathic medicine is that it combines traditional medicine and modern science in the understanding of how the body works [...] so yes, naturopathic medicine is definitely based on science."
yeah, definitely, categorically.
002.b. yet, at her practice in Ontario, we've got the SCIENCE-EJECTED, in terms of therapy, in "What is the Difference Between Naturopathic Doctors and Homeopathic Doctors?" (2015)[2015 archived]:
"naturopathic doctors (NDs) are general practitioners of natural medicine. They are trained to treat ailments using clinical nutrition, acupuncture, botanical medicine, physical medicine, lifestyle counseling and homeopathy. Homeopathic doctors, on the other hand, are trained to practice in one discipline – homeopathy. So while a homeopath would prescribe a homeopathic therapy, a naturopathic doctor would use any of the approaches listed above, including homeopathy, in their treatments."
so, when is what's PATENTLY science-ejected falsely labeled science, anyway? Naturopathy.