Monday, November 23, 2015

The Naturocrit Podcast - s02e01b [Episode 011b] - Script & Annotations

here, I provide an annotated script for the Naturocrit Podcast's Episode 011 Part 2, titled “Naturopathillogical Microcosms: NDs Zampieron and Brady”.  In this s02e11b, I will cover ND Brady:

001. the Episode 011b script and annotations:

Standard Introduction:

Welcome to, as that robot voice says, The Naturocrit Podcast, and thank you for boldly listening.

What ARE we even talking about?

Well, this podcast series is my take on naturopathic medicine, an area I've been studying for about twenty years, including my time in so-called 'scientific nonsectarian naturopathic medical school'.

My approach is a pairing of scientific skepticism and a deep knowledge of naturopathy's intimate details.

In previous episodes of this series, I established that naturopathy is, essentially, a kind of knowledge blending, misrepresentation, and irrationality.

I have termed naturopathy both 'an epistemic conflation falsely posing itself as an epistemic delineation' and 'the naturopathillogical':

the science-exterior is mixed with what is scientific, then that whole muddle is absurdly claimed to be science as an entire category, while particular sectarian science-ejected oath-obligations and -requirements are coded or camouflaged, therein effectively disguising naturopathy's system of beliefs in public view.

Naturopathy's ultimate achievement is a profound erosion of scientific integrity and freedom of belief packaged in the marketing veneers "natural, holistic, integrative and alternative" and improperly embedded in the academic category "science".

Episode 011 Part 2 of 2:

I will now delve into ND Brady material that hasn't been used in Part 1, and there's a good deal of stuff.

I will refer to him as DC-ND Brady just to 'speak it in full', particularly the 'DC credential' that seems to 'dare not speak it's name' these days, from David Brady's mouth.

DC-ND Brady's Web Pages, Interviews, and a Self-Published Book:

DC-ND Brady's has been in since 2004.

I'd said one reason I chose this ND is the abundance of materials which feature him.

And he has gathered much of it up for us, conveniently, at

The home page seems centered upon selling supplements and getting patients to his Fairfield, CT practice.

Currently, as of 2015-10, on that homepage [2015 archived], there's a video on the supplements he sells through this web-site titled “Dr Brady - Formulated Nutriceuticals” [vsc 2015-10-28].

I enjoy that video:

as he talks, he often shakes his head from left to right, almost subliminally telling us "no."

And the expression on his face, ah, the names and faces we did not choose:

that melted downward attempted at a smile, mixed with eyes that stay closed for too long when he blinks!

An appearance of being nauseated and trying to smile through it all:

that's my impression of DC-ND Brady, every since I met him in 1999.


In the video, DC-ND Brady speaks of practicing “integrative, naturopathic, and functional medicine.”

Which is it?

It's whatever's working at the moment, with room to rebrand.

It's definitely NOT 'chiropractic', that seems forbidden.

He even says:

“in my role at the University of Bridgeport, I've been able to participate in the training of the next generation of healthcare providers, physician's of various types and nutritionists alike.”

No chiropractic mentioned there, though it actually is in THERE.

Of course, the idea of 'a chiropractor as a physician' is probably one of the scarier things.

And perhaps, you can't say "chiropractic" for marketing reasons!

The net is not wide enough, chiropractors have quite a stigma.

Regarding his supplement line, DC-ND Brady speaks of being involved:

“in the conception, in the development, in the research, and in the production of really high-quality professional nutriceutical and nutritional supplements which are a very very big part of recovery in many chronic disorders […] I think everybody really deserves professional grade nutriceutical and nutritional supplements. That's why one of my other projects is launching Formulated Nutriceuticals [...] a separate professional-grade line of nutritional supplements that will be available directly to the consumer through my internet site.”

Ah, again, that naturopathic claim of 'reversing what is considered chronic' with 'drug-like things that aren't regulated like drugs but used that way as if'...


As if effective, as if worth the money!

Again, as I'd said earlier, if so, over ALL these decades, then WHERE IS THE REVOLUTION?

DC-ND Brady speaks of his participation in the development of:

“novel, really really cutting edge laboratory tests that help uncover the real reasons why people are sick.”

So, again, that claim of 'getting where regular medicine can't, to the source of illness', what's “real.”


Delightfully ironic, considering what naturopathy claims as “real.”

Such as...

Well, I've talked about a lot of that stuff.

And that laxity then calls into question ALL naturopathic claims.

He speaks of:

“chronic conditions that the medical establishment just doesn't seem to have good answers for […] fibromyalgia, global pain, chronic fatigue, autoimmune disorders.”

I think those are the marks, marketing-wise.

We're also told in the video:

"what does disappoint me is that I constantly get emails [from people who can't come to CT...] to see me in my clinical practice [...] and that is one of the reasons I'm launching the new [...] if you're suffering from any of these conditions, I invite you to join my web community […] so please, join our e-community.“

Expansion, expansion.

Now, I took him up on this offer, as he speaks of A REVOLUTION:

“I'd also be more than happy to send you a copy of my current book, Dr. Brady's Healthy Revolution [...] in addition to that, I'll send you four videos that will update critical sections of the book.”

I have received the book, by way of  USPS, from DC-ND Brady's practice.

I'll include a scan of the envelope in this episode's transcript.

And that's interesting, because there we have moved the contents of that book through postal regulation.

As for science claims, he speaks of being:

“Vice-Provost, Health Sciences Division [at UB...and] associate professor of clinical sciences [...and he says such things as] the scientific data proves that out.”

On this homepage, he's shown wearing a lab coat and stethoscope, under the sign of the UB Health Sciences Center inside that UB Health Sciences Center building, greeting, presumably, a patient.

The caption there reads “become a patient of Dr. Brady” and we're linked to his Fairfield, CT practice

That will be visited.

And the homepage says “visit us on Facebook.”

We shall, both Facebook pages:

his own as a practitioner, and that of his practice group.

Other DC-ND Brady Pages of Interest:

There's another science claim on his bio. page, “About” [2015 archived].

He speaks of:

“Dr. Brady has published a multitude of peer-reviewed scientific papers and textbooks […] Dr. David M. Brady has over 23-years of experience as an integrative physician and over 19 years in health sciences academia […] he currently serves as the Vice Provost for the Division of Health Sciences, Director of the Human Nutrition Institute, and an Associate Professor of Clinical Sciences at the University of Bridgeport in Connecticut.”

And many of his supplement products say “science-based” [2015 archived] in their descriptions [also here; 2015 archived]. has a list of his podcasts [2015 archived].

One, “What is a Naturopathic Doctor? Why and How to Choose One” takes us to the Rand Alvarez show, which I'll get to.

Which isn't really a show, it's paid for by the guests:

as in not journalism, as in commercial.

And another interview I'll get to is not listed, between ND Brady and ND Zampieron.

There's a list of video appearances, one being with Randy Alvarez, which I'll get to as well.

What I Don't Find at

This speaks VOLUMES in terms of what I call 'naturopathy's manipulative opacity.'

Now, this is amazing, at, as far as I can tell by searching with Google, and I've saved the search results, there is no mention of:

naturopathy's principles, medicatrix, healing power, life force, vital force, vitalistic, vitalism, homeopathy or homeopathic, or spirit.

So, there is NO EXPLANATION of naturopathy, of any detail, concerning its essential ideas and activities.

Imagine a Christian church where no Christ is mentioned; imagine a sea-food restaurant with nothing from the sea on the menu.

And I'll say it here:

there is NO REGARD for informed consent through this web page regarding 'the essentially naturopathic.'

So, before I do anything else, let's look, in detail, at the “essentially naturopathic”, the stuff DC-ND Brady finds so averse.

Some of such will also be found, later, in his own book.

The Essentially Naturopathic by Way of UBCNM and AANP -- DC-ND Brady's Alma Mater and the School He Administrates, and the National Org.:

There are some inconvenient truths at the heart of naturopathy, that define naturopathy, that have to be discussed right now.

We need transparency, context, detail.

Now, ND Brady KNOWS what naturopathy is all about:

in terms of its principles, and what it includes, and what it claims.

He is the administrator for that College, he has the degree, he took the OATH [and he was UBCNM's interim dean].

Why doesn't he care to share the information at

Obviously, you can't rely on the supposed 'professionalism' of a licensed ND to get such a job done.

Their practices so often DON'T mention what is essential to know about naturopathy.

I believe people have a right to know up-front, so they can then decide in an informed manner.

As opposed to the manipulative opacity we've seen by way of

Transparency, context, and detail help prevent one from being sucked down rabbit holes of pseudomedical nonsense, academic and commercial deceit, and abject irrationality.

In other words, such defends one against the naturopathillogical.

Because there be lunacy there, in Naturopathyland.

I was in the ND program at UB for four years, from 1998-2002.

I voluntarily left, and we went through a few deans in a few years.

First, there was ND Sensenig, a NCNM ND graduate, who quit the dean position after establishing the school.

He was gone before I started, but was still teaching at the school.

Then, there was ND Hobbs, a 1984 Bastyr ND Graduate.

Then, there was DC-ND Martin, who came from a career in chiropractic administration and had UK ND qualifications.

I'll never forget the day I went into Martin's office and had him sign my leave of absence from UBCNM, a scan of which I put in the Part 1 transcript.

Let me speak about Dean Martin's explanation for what naturopathy is, and how UB explained naturopathy in my era.

These pages are saved at, and they are QUITE MORE transparent and informative than what UB puts up nowadays.

This is the stuff DC-ND Brady has not mentioned, and I believe, once explained, it puts ALL naturopathic claims in doubt and ALL supposed naturopathic competencies in doubt.

NO WONDER they don't often speak of this.

They act as though it is optional, but each ND has taken an OATH to this stuff, including Mr. Brady.

There are six guiding principles that define naturopathy:

they are ideas and behavior mandates.

The first principle is explained on UB's page “Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #1” [2004 archived] which states:

“the healing power of nature, viz medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process, to act to identify and remove obstacles to health and recovery, and to support the creation of a healthy internal and external environment.”

So, there is science-ejected vitalism and teleology:

“life force” that is “intelligent.”

No mention of THAT from DC-ND Brady, and that's the centerpiece of naturopathy.

Yet, the idea that 'a life force purposefully runs the body' is like a pilot telling you planes fly because flying carpets are attached to their wings, instead of engines.

Then, would you let him take you up?

There's the UB page “Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #2” [2004 archived] which states:

“viz tolle causam: illness does not occur without cause. Underlying causes of disease must be discovered and removed or treated before a person can recover completely from illness. Symptoms are expressions of the body's attempt to heal, but are not the cause of disease. Symptoms, therefore, should not be suppressed by treatment. Causes may occur on many levels including physical, mental, emotional and spiritual. The physician must evaluate fundamental underlying causes on all levels, directing treatment at root causes rather than at symptomatic expression.”

So, there's supernaturalism.

And, of course, people have 'a right to believe or not believe'.

This issue here, though, is that UB has placed supernaturalism within “science”, which is actually the LAST PLACE supernaturalism belongs.

Supernaturalism within science to me is as starkly wrong as renaming the color red 'blue'.

There's the UB page “Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #3” [2004 archived] which states:

“first do no harm, viz primum no nocere: illness is a purposeful process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complimentary to and synergistic with this healing process. The physician's actions can support or antagonize the actions of the viz medicatrix naturae [that would be the life force]. Therefore, methods designed to suppress symptoms without removing underlying causes are considered harmful and are avoided or minimized.”

Again, science-ejected vitalism and its handmaiden teleology.

And it's interesting, we have the word symptoms.

Why don't they speak of signs?

Signs are objectively measurable.

How can everything be a symptom?

It's so shoddy.

And there that science-ejected vitalism is stated as "in fact."

So, it's like saying fairy tales are "in fact".

HOW do you align your therapy with an imaginary entity occupying the body?

How do you do that?

HOW do you know?

How do you know you've effected it?

How do you know?

Do you sacrifice goats or something and look to the sky for a sign?

There's the UB page “Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #5” [2004 archived] which states:

"the physician as teacher, viz docere: beyond an accurate diagnosis and appropriate prescription, the physician must work to create a healthy, sensitive interpersonal relationship with the patient. A cooperative doctor-patient relationship has inherent therapeutic value. The physician's major role is to educate and encourage the patient to take responsibility for health. The physician is a catalyst for healthful change, empowering and motivating the patient to assume responsibility. It is the patient, not the doctor, who ultimately creates / accomplishes healing. The physician must strive to inspire hope as well as understanding. The physician must also make a commitment to his/her personal and spiritual development in order to be a good teacher."

That's naturopathy's 'by-oath MANDATED supernaturalism'.

As for being a “teacher”, well, if you're educated that science is basically anything, since the hugely science-ejected and science-exterior are in Naturopathyland within science, WHAT KIND of teacher are you?

The naturopaths haven't ever taken "responsibility" for their educational nonsense basis. 

How can they inspire “understanding”, and “educate”, if they truly don't understand basic knowledge-kind demarcations, and truly won't abide knowledge-kind demarcations, and won't succinctly explain naturopathy to the public at their own practice pages?

Before asking the patient to "take responsibility", there's a whole bunch of house-cleaning that naturopathy must do within itself, me thinks.

All of these pages say “Dr. Peter Martin, Dean” on them, and my classmates and instructors at the time are in the pictures.

Now, there are other links on each of these Principle pages.

One is “Today's Naturopathic Physician” [2004 archived] which states:

“today's naturopathic physician serves on the front line of health care as a primary care physician, practicing scientific medicine.”

Yes, after stating that essentially naturopathy is based upon science-ejected junk, then they throw the label “scientific” upon it all.

As if.

Naturopathy is fraudulent at its CORE.

It is quite the epistemic muddle and laxity, mislabeled an epistemic stringency.

And the page “College of Naturopathic Medicine“ [2004 archived] states:

“naturopathic physicians (N.D.) are the highest trained practitioners in the broadest scope of naturopathic medical modalities. In addition to the basic medical sciences and conventional diagnostics, naturopathic education includes therapeutic nutrition, botanical medicine, homeopathy, natural childbirth, classical Chinese medicine, hydrotherapy, naturopathic manipulative therapy, pharmacology and minor surgery. A licensed naturopathic physician (N.D.) attends a four-year graduate level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. but also studies holistic and nontoxic approaches to therapy with a strong emphasis on disease prevention and optimizing wellness. The naturopathic physician is required to complete training in clinical nutrition, acupuncture, homeopathic medicine, botanical medicine, psychology, and counseling (to encourage people to make lifestyle changes in support of their personal health). A naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams so that he or she may be licensed by a state or jurisdiction as a primary care general practice physician. We welcome the opportunity to assist you through the academic and admissions process. Should you have any questions or concerns do not hesitate to contact the Graduate Office of Admissions.”

There's the enticement:

come join our mindfucked cult.

Now, you'd think if you “base” yourself on science, if you are scientific, then the things you'd do wouldn't be 'crazy stupid science-ejected'.

But, minimally, you see homeopathy there on the list, with other 'essential to naturopathy' woo.

And that “rigorous” board exam claims, currently, that homeopathy is a “clinical science”, which is bat-shit crazy.

And there's that “professional” claim.

But when is it ever professional to be based upon nonsense?

Yet, in 2000, on the page “Schools and Colleges” [2000 archived], we're told that naturopathy is within a:

“Division of Health Sciences.”

So, with science allowed to be basically ANYTHING at Naturopathyland University, I have to ask:

is this the proper kind of education for someone who is going to practice primary care medicine?

It's crazy.

And though DC-ND Brady doesn't mention any of this, it's what is at the CORE of naturopathy and the public should be told up front through EVERY naturopathy practitioner's site.

But, I guess that's bad for business.

By the way, the UB catalog of that era, which I have in my possession in paper format, for the year 2000-2001, states:

“[the] division of health sciences [...includes the] college of naturopathic medicine […] the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine offers as professional program […] a curriculum designed to meet the highest national standards for naturopathic medicine education […] admission requirements […] be courses suitable for students majoring in sciences […] UBCNM is an institutional member of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians […it] received accreditation from the Connecticut State Department of Higher Education in May 2000 […] a private, non-sectarian, comprehensive university […] to educate men and women of personal integrity and social conscience […] provide comprehensive natural health care through the Integrated Health Science Center […] provide community education on science based natural therapies […] naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles upon which its practice is based […] methods and modalities are selected and applied based upon these principles […they are] continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances […] principles: the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae […and] total health includes spiritual health […] naturopathic practice includes […] homeopathy […] much of the first two academic years of training is devoted to the basic sciences […] the second two academic years consist largely of the clinical sciences […] clinic training will begin semester 5 and continue through semester 8 […] requirements for graduation […] have successfully completed all requirements of the educational program […] the University of Bridgeport does not discriminate on the basis of sex, age, color, creed, ethnic origin or handicap in the administration of its programs or on admission.”

And of course, on page 240, is this language:

“Homeopathic Medicine 621, Homeopathy 1 […] the concepts presented in the course include vitalism, the concept of the vital force in disease.”

That is the first of three mandatory homeopathy courses, in a division of health sciences, that says you MUST engage in the supernatural.

I think there are 'naturopathy inherent things' that DC-ND Brady doesn't think we deserve or have the right to know.

But I think they immensely matter.

Leaving them out is as odd as:

discussing what Christianity is all about without mentioning JC, discussing what swimming is all about with someone without mentioning that fact that you are going to get wet.

In his interview with Randy Alvarez that I'll get to, DC-ND Brady recommends for more information.

That's the AANP, the same AANP that that 2000 UB catalog mentions when it states:

“UBCNM is an institutional member of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians.”

In the transcript to this episode Part, I'll link to 2015 archived AANP web pages that cover:

You know it's the year 2015.

The stuff I reference is from the year 2000.

This stuff is perpetually naturopathic.

Ah, the deviance, the perversity.

Rotten at the core, and yet they say you need this apple every day:

the perversion.

DC-ND Brady Media:

At, in 2014, DC-ND Brady suggested:

view the new University of Bridgeport Health Sciences video with Dr. Brady” [2014 archived], which is a video I've already covered in Part 1.

He has an 'media list' at [2015 archived].

I'll look at three items:

two video and one audio interview with Randy Alvarez.

A forth item will be an interview with, of all people, ND Zampieron from Part 1.

DC-ND Brady on the Randy Alvarez Show [as video]:

His program is, apparently, “The Wellness Hour”, and it tells us after its videos, in the credits, usually:

“this [] a paid program.”

What does that mean?

Guests pay to be on it, apparently.

It's a commercial, as opposed to journalism, and it tells us so.

Is that why the host FAUNS over the guests so adoringly?

At, in “About Us” [2015 archived], we're told:

“to schedule a one on one marketing consultation with Randy Alvarez call [this number].”

In “Services” [2015 archived], at, you can buy the "Wellness Hour All Inclusive Multi-Media Production Package”, which is one PAYING for:

"a 30-minute professionally produced interview on The Wellness Hour with show host Randy Alvarez [...] half-day use of The Wellness Hour Studio [...] hair and makeup by a professional stylist [...] extensive media coaching with show host Randy Alvarez."

And it's interesting that in the videos, the impression is that DC-ND Brady 'is stopping by to talk, we're lucky to have him, he just happens to be in town, and he's very very busy, very generous, and very informed'.

So, this is an infomercial, apparently, paid for by DC-ND Brady [or possibly UB], and I think it is then regulated under advertising law as opposed to journalistic code.

But it really doesn't want you to know that, that obviously.

This “paid” notification is buried in the closing credits.

If you were not careful, you'd think you were watching a journalistic interview.

Things are JUST NOT what they appear to be, so often, in Naturopathyland:

you have to peel back the camouflaging veneer.

And what's made up:

it's rather amusing to hear the host say Brady 'must be doing something right, you look great', when DC-ND Brady has apparently paid for professional makeup artists to gussy him up for the show.

The 2011 dated video "Functional Medicine with Dr. David Brady on The Randy Alvarez Show" [2015 saved] is approximately 27 minutes long.

The video's description tells us:

“functional medicine is a medical approach that treats the body as a whole. Randy Alvarez interviews Dr. David Brady.”

Boy, they don't like using credentials.

They like using titles.

But they don't like using credentials.

You might assume that Dr. Brady was an MD, as in medial doctor:

that's a wide net, the kind that you use in marketing.

And in the video, we're told:

“Dr. David M. Brady [...has written] Dr. Brady's Healthy Revolution [] […and there's also]”

Now, that book-centered '.com' address apparently is no longer up.

In, it kicks us over to

There, the book's front material is in a downloadable “Look Inside the Book” archived PDF.

And there is a supplement store link.

Here's some dialog from the video, and my comments.

Alvarez states and asks:

“my first guest is Dr. David Brady […] a licensed naturopathic physician […] we invited Dr. Brady on the program today to discuss his new book [after he paid us, wink-wink…] 'Healthy Revolution: What You really Need to Know to Stay Healthy in a Sick World' [...a] new book […a] hot book […] you're a clinical professor at the University of Bridgeport […] you're a well-respected guy […] who should read your book by the way?”

Brady answers:

“it's written for the average person […] for my patients to read […] so they understand what I'm doing […] every new patient of mine has to read the book [… ] I want them to understand the paradigm I'm operating in […] and the historical context of it, and the science behind it […] I went them to be very confident that what I'm doing is going to help them, because they're more likely to follow through, and stay compliant with their recovery […] I feel if people would read the book they would be more likely to put out a good effort to actually be well […] the book really covers a lot of ground […] it really tries to pierce through the hype […] I looked at the scientific literature and the evidence base behind a lot of these claims […] functional medicine [….] medicine not centered on disease as much as it is on function, optimal function […] I like the word complementary […] I go into a lot of this in the book. I spend a decent amount of time in talking about what our standard Western medical system is all about, how it developed, why it has the biases it has, why it has the philosophies that it has.”

Ah, a history lesson, a science lesson, from someone who does not transparently contextualize naturopathy on his own pages, who runs an institution that doesn't do that either:

I'm wary.

If institutionally, naturopathy claims, against all of history, in terms of what science is and supports, that what's nonscience is indeed science, then the most obvious question here is:

what kind of integrity do we have here?

It's INTEGRative without INTEGRity.

Now that's “hype”.

Speaking of “biases”!

So, my question is 'can DC-ND Brady's integrity be trusted', in this sense:

he claims to cut through the hype, he claims to vet scientifically, yet we know the science standards he is embedded within, aka UB and naturopathy HISTORICALLY / currently, permit basically ANYTHING epistemically speaking, to be termed science.

And when I excerpt from the book later, you'll see the same old nonsense or hype:

like scientifically-vetted 'homeopathy and vitalism sure sure', scientifically-vetted 'applied kinesiology sure sure.'

It's ALL GOOD, sure sure.

Ironic, because we're told “integrative” medicine, yet the purveyors have no internal consistency, no integrity.

That's “well-respected”?

And how can integrity happen with an area intent on blending, or heaping in or complementing, all kinds?

And then mislabeling that as rigorous, stringent, as delineation.

You may consider that muddle “a holistic approach.” 

And yet of course, a “scientific” false label is placed upon it all, a ruse.

It's the 'accept anything and mislabel', as opposed to the 'analyze and vet with rigorous science'.

And I'll take on one particular claim that irks me A LOT in this interview, because I think DC-ND Brady is talking out of his ass on this one so blatantly.

Alvarez states and asks:

“your take on exercise is different than I've ever heard […] you don't like long cardio. it seems […] how could too much exercise make somebody fat?”


“well, I think it has diminishing returns. The body adapts to cardio. so you have to keep pushing the body in a way that it's not used to for you to get a benefit from [...] exercise [...instead do] burst training [...which involves] equipment […and is] very high intensity […] short intervals […] exercise regularly but exercise smartly […] exercise correctly.”

I come from a background in exercise science, fitness, personal training, and geriatric fitness programming.

What Brady recommends smells badly.

I don't see how people will adhere to what he recommends, because such intensity is synonymous with PAIN.

'Diminishing returns, adapts, lack of benefit' from a regular fitness regime?

Smells badly.

I don't see how people will adhere to what he recommends.

It's just sounds like bullshit in terms of PRACTICAL application.

In terms of a regular exercise program, you benefit from what you do, from your level of activity, even if you are in such shape that what once was difficult is now easy and now a maintenance-type fitness program.

You don't lose benefit from being conditioned.

You may not gain greater conditioning, but DC-ND Brady speaks as if 'if it isn't continually taxing and pushing one's capabilities, it's a waste of time.'

 I totally disagree. 

You are not going to get people to consistently exercise, in a lifetime fitness and wellness kind of way, if you turn exercise into pain sessions.

Huge swaths of data in fact show that simple weekly walking regimes are quite beneficial.

So 'comfort' can be quite beneficial.

It may not be the best way, the MOST healthy thing, but definitely even basic comfortable things are quite beneficial.

Alvarez asks:

“and there's science behind what you're saying?”

And Brady answers:

“absolutely. Science changes very quickly but people's habits change very slowly.”

Oh, that “absolutely” will be stated again when I cover DC-ND Brady's testimony before the CT legislature.

Remember this if you remember anything about DC-ND Brady:

he likes to say “absolutely.”

And the second part of that answer is priceless.

Yes, naturopathy, science changes very quickly and naturopathy's habits don't change at all.

And anther peeve I have is that Brady tells us supplements are QUITE NECESSARY.

He states, and we have to keep in mind that DC-ND Brady sells a line of supplements:

“I think they're required now unless you eat a very very healthy diet.”

Alvarez asks:

“why are supplements so controversial?”

And Brady answers:

“because I think they go against the medical orthodoxy. The name of the game in standard Western medicine is really to treat with drugs and surgery [strawman]. And certainly they have their place and they do wonderful things […] standard medicine has really not embraced vitamin supplements [...they are moving that way because] the science is too compelling to ignore […] there's major science behind the role of supplements in health […] the science behind these things […] the book goes into some ways to pick good-quality supplements […] they're not all the same […] there's a lot of basic things that people should be doing […] what vitamin supplements are really necessary […] it's clearly not just placebo effect [...] if you don't have them your biochemistry breaks down […] there's really good science behind that.”

The “science”, in fact is NOT moving that way.

And I don't think 'the name of the game in standard Western medicine' is:

"to treat with drugs and surgery".

I think the name of the game is beneficence.

Science more and more is telling us that people who eat a well-balanced diet don't need supplements, beyond a few considerations that are well-demarcated.

We're even seeing very compelling data that megasupplementation harms.

And isn't it ironic that conventional medicine is criticized as being reflexive and orthodox, yet there's this DC-ND Brady mantra:

supplement, supplement, supplement.

And again, I'll echo:

but where, oh where, is the REVOLUTION if this stuff is so remarkable?

We're told “the science is too compelling to ignore”, but the UB ND crowd has NO PROBLEM ignoring the fact that swathes upon swathes of the essentially naturopathic are PATENTLY science-debunked.

And yet they call it science anyway.

So, there is QUITE compelling evidence that indicates NATUROPATHY is the ORTHODOXY POSING as progressive science:

the orthodoxy in progressive clothing.

Brady tells us:

“you need a professional who really understands the science behind these herbs and nutritional supplements and knows how to test, find out what you need, why you need it, how much you need, and how long you need it […] we give you the science behind it.”

But, I'm skeptical because, of course, DC-ND Brady is of a context that claims that the patently science-exterior is indeed science.

So I don't things he's:

"a professional who really understands the science."

Because I don't think science in Naturopathyland is legitimate:

it is unbounded.

I'll term that 'science bullshit artistry'.

And here's a funny little memory I have of DC-ND Brady, happened in real life.

Around 1999, when I was an ND student at UB, we had a Halloween costume party on campus.

I dressed up as an artist, and I wore an easel and paints, and people could paint on me.

Brady painted on the canvas, “pick ass o", a play on Picasso.

That's quite ironic, considering the current false shit UB writes about naturopathy to this day:

ass-picked and smeared bullshit artistry.

And, in listening closely to Brady in this interview, I have to ask:

for his book, though he's listed as the sole author, were there participating ghost co-writers?

Because so often he says 'we write in the book'...

DC-ND Brady also did another video “paid program” on Randy Alvarez's Show, the 2011 published Fibromyalgia with Dr. Brady on The Randy Alvarez Show [2015 saved].

We're told:

“[from the description] fibromyalgia cures with Dr. Brady on The Randy Alvarez Show […and from the video, Brady says] we practice medicine the way its supposed to be practiced […not just] trying to make their symptoms better […] it's mainly for people who have long-term chronic problems […] our wellness perspective […our] comprehensive care [...that] really gets to the bottom of how the cell's make energy, how well the person detoxifies toxins in their environment […] chemicals from industry, from process foods [...] a toxic chemical [...] the toxins that we're all exposed to […] we can have profound impacts […] oftentimes they are [toxic...] we often get profound effects.”

The Toxin Boogeyman.

And of course we're told by Alvarez:

“we've invited you on the show to talk about those two topics” yet later we are told “this was a paid program.”

DC-ND Brady on Randy Alvarez's Podcast:

This is the third Randy Alvarez item I'll cover, wherein ND Brady is interviewed on Randy Alvarez's Podcast in an hour-long episode titled “Why Choose a Naturopathic Doctor - David Brady, N.D.” [2015 archived].

This is from 2013-03-06, and is described as “Randy talks to David Brady, ND about why to choose a naturopathic doctor.”

Good question.

And the more you know about naturopathy's knowledge-base laxity, I think naturopathy becomes less and less of a viable choice, because, and as a reminder, I'll repeat:

DC-ND Brady runs a College of Naturopathy, amongst other woo, that claims patent nonscience is “science.”

Now, I assume this was also paid for, by DC-ND Brady [or UB], which seems to be what Randy Alvarez Inc. is for.

So, it's funny in the episode to hear Alvarez pose as a journalist and say “one of the reasons I wanted to do this podcast” and “I want to thank you for coming on the program”, and DC-ND Brady also states “you won't find me advertising.”

We're told by Alvarez:

“we're talking about naturopathic medicine, integrative medicine, functional medicine and why you may want to chose an ND […] why an ND? […] let's talk a little bit about your training […these] real medical schools.”

Yes, real:

with really, really good stuff within them like 'science subset homeopathy unreality'.

How real.

Alvarez continues:

“with us we definitely have an expert on the topic […] it's Dr. David Brady […of a] huge, impressive resume […] you're one of the guys that really knows this [stuff…] tell us about […] what you're doing there at the University of Bridgeport.”

Yes, tell us how, since 1997, you've been in operation as academic commerce with false epistemic categorizations:

as if categorically science.

Alvarez asks:

“what are the misconceptions about what you do that you can maybe shed light on or lay to rest here?”

Do, indeed, DC-ND Brady:

you are the impressive expert, with so much INTEGRITY.

You are the man for the job.

Brady says:

“presently I'm the Vice-Provost of the Division of Health Sciences at the University of Bridgeport […] my position here in academia [...] I basically am the chief administrator and oversee […] all of the health sciences [...including] our college of naturopathic medicine […] those deans report to me.”

So, here is the spider at the center of the web at UB.

The lure is “science”.

Within, in terms of what's essentially naturopathy, there is such nonscience as 'homeopathy, vitalism, supernaturalism and such kinds of ideas and activities'.

Brady even states:

“homeopathy [...a] component of naturopathic medical training.”

Ah, an admission that homeopathy is there, within naturopathy.

That will come in handy later, regarding his testimony.

Alvarez asks:

“how does your training differ from a traditional medical doctor?”

DC-ND Brady answers:

“a licensed naturopathic medical physician […] really good quality preventative healthcare […] an ND, naturopathic doctor […or in some states] NMD […] who are legitimately trained […] there's a distinction to be made between a fully-trained naturopathic physician who went to medical school and someone who is claiming to be a naturopath or traditional naturopath […like] ANMA […] they should ask what naturopathic program they graduated from […] and they should make sure that's a CNME accredited naturopathic medical school […in North America there are] 7 CNME accredited naturopathic medical schools […] which is the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education, which is the Federally recognized accrediting body for naturopathic medical schools [...where] naturopaths are trained in a very specific way [...] the rules of the game and the competencies are very much defined […] real medical school […with] licensing exams [the NPLEX…check with] AANP [….] I would encourage people to look at the web site for the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians […which is]”

Ah, yes, let's make “distinctions” regarding an area that likes to conflate or blend knowledge, and then illegitimately term that whole area the unblended, distinct knowledge kind “science.”

We're led to believe that a 4-year, in-residence naturopathy program is 'the way to go'.

But, CNME naturopathy schools falsely pose so much as “science” that isn't, and so does AANP.

And such is on their licensure exam as well.

And DC-ND Brady takes wide swipes at conventional medicine.

He states such things as:

“conventional, allopathic medical school […] the students are trained into an attitude or a mind-think […] this paint by numbers medicine […] there's sort of an arrogance attached to going to conventional medical school […] well I went to Yale and if I wasn't taught this at Yale it couldn't possibly exist […] the medical doctor knows all […] the paradigm at Yale and Harvard […] so it must be right […] a lot of myopic, conventionally trained medical physicians […with their] golden initials […] the paradigm of using drugs and surgery […with other things] ignored […] you're not really as trained to think broadly as […] a naturopathic medical physician […] naturopaths are generalists.”

Well, conventional medical school is as much allopathic as modern chemistry is alchemic, as I'm fond of saying:

it's simply bullshit to term conventional medicine allopathy.

Who is being arrogant, myopic, ignoring and unchanging?

That's a fascinating kind of 'we're right' insistence, though built in to naturopathy is so much that is WRONG.

While, Brady states such things as:

“[an ND is] a very inquisitive generalist.”

Well, if you are, as an ND, inquisitive and therein being broad, then you can easily find out that 'naturopathy's claimed as science stuff like homeopathy, vitalism and supernaturalism are science-exterior'.

But then you are in quite a pickle:

because they you'll have to admit how smelly, in a rotten kind of way, naturopathy is.

And if you can't admit this as an ND, I'd say you are being quite ROBOTIC, quite paint-by-numbers.

Loyal, but not loyal to science and its generalized inquiry; loyal to sectarian or narrow interests and dogmas.

And Brady tells us:

“the more naturopathic or functional approach is to really start investigating […it's] investigative medicine […finding] what's actually, really wrong with you.”

Oh, the irony:

can naturopathy do that with itself?

Really investigate, find out what's really wrong with itself!

And yet Brady tells us too:

“it's modern evidence-based integrative medicine […] we look a lot deeper […] the naturopaths, when they prescribe drugs, do it safer actually, they do it more conservatively, and they deliver primary care less expensively, and they consume less resources and they have better outcomes […] I definitely see massive improvement.”

Yes, that claim of 'naturopathy is better, regular medicine is negligent.'

Naturopathy KNOWS.

Naturopathy creates massive improvement, but for some reason these results are just not published in reputable, rigorously-vetted journals.

Therein, naturopathy knows secret things, that people need but are being somehow DENIED by conventional medicine.

But it's not difficult to find EVIDENCE that naturopathy is based on a lack of integrity:

that they claim science on what doesn't have science.

But we're told it's conventional medicine that is being manipulative, not naturopathy.

It's quite amusing to hear Brady state, about drugs:

what better way to sell a product “than to convince the consumer they can never get off of it.”

Kind of like 'use these supplements, average person, or you are going to be ill.'

And it's also amusing to hear Alvarez state:

“your job as an ND, reversals is part of your life.”

Yes, reversals of values, me thinks.

And at one point Brady states:

“that is insane, it's insane.”

Yes it is.

And let me deal with the term “reductionistic.”

DC-ND Brady criticizes modern medicine as “reductionistic”, stating:

“their paradigm is different […] the old way [...] reductionist[ic].”

And I'd argue that what he's talking about is when variables are narrowed down to determine the true effect of an intervention, or lack thereof.

Now, I'd say analytical is a synonym for reductionistic, and rigorous.

I think science simultaneously takes big macro-views on things, and small micro-views on things.

Brady terms naturopathy, instead of reductionistic:

“a systems biology perspective […a naturopath] looks at the whole matrix [...while] it's a little hard to know what's doing what because we throw a lot of things at people.”

That's quite the admission.

So, I'd therein point out that naturopathy DOESN'T CARE to find out what truly is efficacious, in a causalistic kind of way, it refuses to look at the small, particulate details.

They prefer to be nebulous as opposed to reductionistic, lax as opposed to rigorous, non-analytical and dogmatic as opposed to inquiry-driven and progressive.

And, at one point, DC-ND Brady states:

“it's a different paradigm […] it's a matter of paradigm and training.”


The DC-ND Brady - ND Zampieron Podbean Interview:

So, here's an interesting confluence:

the two NDs this episode deals with in the same audio interview.

At, there's a 56 minute-long episode titled “The Natural Nurse and Dr. Z - Auto Immune Disease”, which was published December 2013

We're told, in its description: 

“Eugene Zampieron, ND, interviews David M. Brady, ND, DC […] Dr. David Brady has 22-years of experience as an integrative physician and over 18 years in health sciences academia. He is a licensed naturopathic medical physician in CT and VT [...who] received his original clinical training as a chiropractic physician. He currently serves as the Vice Provost for the Division of Health Sciences [...and is] Interim Dean of the College of Naturopathic Medicine, and Director of the Human Nutrition Institute at the University of Bridgeport in Connecticut […] Dr. Brady has published a multitude of peer-reviewed scientific papers […] contact:”

So there's science, science, science.

Oh, by the way, at the Naturocrit Blog, I recently posted a taken-from-curbside picture of the new construction at UB with the title to the post:

 “Academic Pseudoscience Pays.”

It sure does, it sure does.

Here are some things that stood out from the podcast.

At its start, ND Zampieron states:

“we're going to be talking about autoimmune disease with Dr. David Brady […] a fabulous source of information […] an integrative physician […] a licensed naturopathic physician in Connecticut and Vermont […] a doctor of chiropractic [...and currently the] Vice-Provost for the Division of Health Sciences and interim dean of the College of Naturopathic Medicine […] at the University of Bridgeport […] he also maintains a private practice […] he's published a multitude of peer-reviewed and scientific textbooks […] his latest popular book is entitled 'Dr. Brady's Health Revolution'.”

 A book is titled, it's not entitled, but lets not quibble.

I've been waiting for a Revolution for SO LONG.

So, DC-ND Brady is called a “fabulous source of information” by the guy, ND Zampieron, who absurdly defends homeopathy, falsely terms such “science-based”, and calls me an assassin for pointing out that UB is full of shit, that such is full of shit.

Also mentioned, a 'science expertise' claim upon Brady, and that DC-ND Brady book we'll be looking at later.

Yet, if DC-ND Brady IS such a “fabulous source of information”, how come he couldn't tell us transparently about naturopathy at his own naturopathy practice online pages?

And how come he runs a “division of health sciences” with so much crap within?

His book, by the way:

it begins to LOOM.

DC-ND Brady states, immediately after that ND Zampieron introduction:

“thanks Dr. Z., I should have given you a shorter bio. […] we're absolutely honored to have you on the faculty at the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine.”

How intimate!

To quote from a House, MD episode:

“before you guys break out the oil...”

So, obviously, the bio. read by Zampieron was scripted by Brady.

ND Zampieron then states:

“we appreciate you coming on and appreciate a luminary as yourself […] I wanted to talk about your work at the University of Bridgeport. I think it deserves some time in the program […] the fabulous evolution of alternative healthcare at UB and you're an integral part of it, being the Vice-Provost.”

So, DC-ND Brady is a “luminary”, and what UB is doing, as in 'science subset nonscience', well, that's “fabulous.”

These are VERY STRANGE values.

DC-ND Brady states:

“we're very proud of it […] in the realm of health science education […] a major university system […] at UB we have a CNME accredited 4-year college of naturopathic medicine […] within our health science center […] changing the landscape of health care […] as we train these folks […] we're teaching the new dogs a different way of doing it right from the beginning.”

So, this is ground-zero, or even a couple of patient-zeros, in terms of the naturopathillogical:

'science subset naturopathy subset nonscience'!

And “proud of it.”

The falsehood...

The sectarianism...

The use of a certain kind of sectarian brain-washing soap...

As an allied healthcare instructor, it PAINS ME to see people miseducated so abusively, and so expertly.

DC-ND Brady tells us:

“we see about 30,000 patient visits a year, were we deliver integrative, naturopathic, functional, chiropractic type of care to people who otherwise wouldn't be able to necessarily afford it or access it.”

Wow, that's a lot of woo commerce.

Afflicted upon low income marks.

DC-ND Brady adds:

“we've really developed ourselves into the center of excellence in the country if not the world […see] […see] the area of our website that talks about the health sciences […and he mentions you can visit] [...and he also mentions you can visit]”

Really, 'science subset nonscience' is, at Naturopathyland University, “excellence”.

I think the world disagrees.

Saying it's so doesn't make it so:

saying 'homeopathy and kind' is health science doesn't make all that junk science.

But naturopathy has no problem, with its reversal of values, posing 'junk is excellence'.

Such shiny, luminous excellent excrement. 

As a web site, that mentioned is no longer functional, which is quite ironic.

It has some entries archived at from the year 2011, which redirect to and the page "UB Clinics" [2011 archived]

That page links to the page "Patient Bill of Rights" [2015 archived], which apparently covers ALL clinical activity that occurs by UB and its agents.

That page also has a link to "naturopathic medicine clinic."

The "UB Clinics" URL progresses this way:

'health sciences' forward slash 'ub clinics' forward slash 'patients bill rights'.

With a "Patient Bill of Rights", lifted from I assume the typical medical ethical code, we have UB stepping into what I'll call 'the realm of universal medical ethics'.

Incidentally, my next podcast episode will be concerned with that area, 'the realm of universal medical ethics', because naturopathy IGNORES so much of modern healthcare ethics, and standards of fair trade in terms of commerce.

We're told in that UB "Patient Bill of Rights":

“the patient must [...] have the benefit of complete information […so the patient is] informed […with] relevant, current, and understandable information […and the patient has] the right to make decisions […and therein, in sum] to make informed medical choices […about] appropriate and medically indicated care and services […and overall has] the right to considerate and respectful care.”

That's fascinating.

How considerate and respectful is falsehood?

How complete is falsehood?

I have to ask:

are the patients told, as this document says they SHOULD BE, that such naturopathy claims as 'science subset homeopathy, vitalism, and supernaturalism' are FALSE?

That naturopathy's laxity is SO VAST that such ABJECTLY science-exterior stuff, for starters, is falsely termed science by UB?

In other words, are the patient's told:

'here at UB, our health science includes pseudoscience'?

I don't see such a disclaimer at

I can't see how, then, patient's are making informed decisions.

When the source of information, UB and its agents, are wrong about things.

So, the patient has rights that are being trampled upon.

And ND Zampieron states, at one point, in a broad manner:

“it's certainly a new paradigm.”

Well, I disagree.

It's actually an old paradigm, a prescientific, knowledge-type non-distinguishing muddle:

a knowledge-type integration aka blending aka conflating, that is falsely posed as science, a knowledge-type demarcation.

And my favorite label for all this is "a failed medieval paradigm", and I thank Canada's skeptics for that label.

And they talk about rheumatology.

ND Zampieron states:

“I teach rheumatology at the naturopathic school […] mainstream medicine […has] a major paradigm dysfunction in thinking […and they just] suppress symptoms […] set the listeners straight.”

Yes, the guy, DC-ND Brady, who can't tell us straight about naturopathy, will now function as a reliable source?

DC-ND Brady gushes:

“well that's an excellent introduction. I agree with everything you said.”

So again, this accusation that regular medicine has it wrong, and naturopaths are expert in what's right.

They KNOW, they're BETTER.

DC-ND Brady continues:

“this autoimmune epidemic […] your right […] they don't spend any time or energy in determining what's causing all of this […] they're not really getting at the core cause […like] stealth pathogens […] quiet infection[s…of] Proteus […] Clebsiella […] Citrobacter […] multiple different types of bacteria, viruses, and even food proteins [] multiple pathways into the same disease […] that is just not being done by the standard specialists and docs out there […] if you go back to the tenets of modern Western medicine […] the germ theory […] this germ causes that disease […] it is ingrained within the philosophy of that medical paradigm […] in a very reductionist fashion […] one virus, one bacteria […] causes a specific disease […] it's a very linear, reductionist model […] a very reductionist, linear model […] which modern medicine loves […and he speaks of] novel food sensitivity testing […] we're giving them all kinds of things [...] to block the autoimmune response […] these foundational things […and he speaks of articles in] Scientific American.“

Well, I've already spoken about what I think a criticism of “reductionism” is:

a criticism of stringent analysis.

And again, that claim that modern medicine is NEGLIGENT.

But mentioning Scientific American, what a gift.

After all, it is SciAm that DEMOLISHES the heart of naturopathy:

that vitalism, teleology, and supernaturalism are properly WITHIN science.

Scientific American has the 2004 article "The Evolution of Ernst: Interview with Ernst Mayr" [2015 archived] in which Mayer, an ACTUAL scientist, states:

"I show that biology is as serious, honest, legitimate a science as the physical sciences. All the occult stuff that used to be mixed in with philosophy of biology like vitalism and teleology [and I'd add dualism and supernaturalism...] all this sort of funny business I show is out. Biology has exactly the same hard-nosed basis as the physical sciences, consisting of the natural laws."

I believe there's a certain kind of explosion noise required right now:


Now that article was written in 2004, and right now it's 2015 and very close to 2016.

North American naturopathy is obviously engaged in 'a racket of science denialism and false science postures'.

ND Zampieron at one point states:

“these [...] board certified rheumatologists, they're no slouches.”

And so I have to wonder WHO could be 'of slouching' here?

Perhaps the slouches are miseducated practitioners, aka from a background that doesn't grossly distinguish between science and the patently science-ejected, between therapies and pseudotherapies, diagnostics and pseudodiagnostics, who are pretending an expertise or ignoring a need for an expertise, in a complex medical specialty area?

That sounds slouchy to me, and oh so familiar.

And what I'm struck by, overall, is the similarity between what Brady covers and that old-time:
'everything is a toxin, therefore you are toxic, I've measured you with my fringomagicometer, you must buy these pills from me directly and stick to this harsh dietary regime to remedy that'.

It's just dressed up in a 'scientishic garnishment'.

And what I mean by scientishic is:

sounding science-like in today's chic science jargon, but oh so not producing firm comparative outcomes data.

Actually, such is AVERSE to analysis, since such analysis is deemed of the ugly “reductionistic”.

WHERE is the revolution if such things are so remarkable?


It's more likely that there's a certain kind of patient that is fished for, who also self-select, with certain kinds of issues that wax and wane and involve a lot of subjective evaluation and psychological participation, and add into that patient desperation and their affluence.


DC-ND Brady's Facebook Page:

At the Facebook page for Brady, you can click SHOP and buy his supplements at and there are at least 2 pictures with him in front of the “UB Health Sciences” signage.

But there's not much else.

DC-ND Brady's YouTube Channel:

He has a fledgling YouTube channel with one video on it right now.

The account name is “Dr. David Brady”.

The video, which is a purported lesson in history, is “Dr. David Brady - Halloween Video 2015", which I was sent a link to in an email from Brady, because I'm part of his club.

We're told:

“[from the description] why do witches fly on broomsticks? In this video you will learn about the history of Halloween and herbal medicine.”

Ah, a history lesson.

We're told in the video:

“by and large, what was happening back then, was women were being put to death sometimes for practicing herbal medicine […] because that would be the purview of God not of somebody practicing this herbal medicine […] now where did that come from?”

And I love the 'broad sometimes'.

How is something 'by and large' but only 'sometimes'.

This is how they think.

And he tells a story, from days of yore:

application of hallucinogenic herbs vaginally on sticks, and therefore women feeling as through they're flying around aka witches on broomsticks.


He's taking us behind the imagery, which is QUITE IRONIC, as he has conjured imagery all his own that needs 'an explainer, or someone to pull the curtain back and expose'.

The imagery being 'like science but not science' imagery:

'things from days of yore falsely posed as able to withstand today's scientific scrutiny'.

DC-ND Brady's Practice and at and Its Facebook Page:

So, there's a picture of DC-ND Brady at his practice's homepage.

Oh David, I know you try to smile, but the corners of your mouth won't rise, so you have to basically raise your entire upper lip to get some teeth to show.

Ah, life...

Anyway, DC-ND Brady practices with NDs Breiner and Sokolova.

ND Breiner was also a fellow classmate of mine, for a while at UB's ND program around 1998-1999, until he transferred to CCNM in Toronto, Canada where he then graduated from.

ND Sokolova's practice bio. [2015 archived] states she graduated from UB's ND program and:

"has advanced certifications [ such things as] homeopathy."

ND Breiner's bio. [2015 archived] tells us he practices such things as:

"homeopathy [...and] hyperbaric oxygen for the the treatment of Lyme. stroke, ADD, trauma, and other neurological conditions."

Sounds like a panacea, and I'll return to "hyperbaric", believe me.

DC-ND Brady's practice bio. [2015 archived] states:

"in addition to seeing patients at Whole-Body Medicine, Dr. Brady also serves as Vice Provost of the Division of Health Sciences [...and is] an Associate Professor of Clinical Sciences at the University of Bridgeport [ ... ] he is also the author of the consumer education book, Dr. Brady's Healthy Revolution, What You Really Need to Know to Stay Healthy in a Sick World."

The practice looks rather 'typically naturopathic' with such therapies [2015 archived] as:

"acupuncture [...] homeopathic [ ... ] colon hydrotherapy [...] detoxification [...] visceral manual therapy [...and that] hyperbaric oxygen therapy."

Now, that "hyperbaric" stands out.

We are actually promised in "Conditions We Treat by HBOT" [2015 archived]:

"there are many neurological conditions that respond well to hyperbaric oxygen therapy [...] HBOT [...including] autism, acute necrotizing fasciitis, anoxic ischemic encephalopathy, carbon monoxide intoxication, cerebral palsy, chronic fatigue, coma, cranial nerve syndrome, Crohn's disease, decompression illness, gas gangrene, lepromatous leprosy, Lyme disease, multiple sclerosis, migraine, poor wound healing, peripheral neuropathy, post surgical repair of ligaments and tendons, radiation osteonecrosis, reflex sympathetic dystrophy [...] sickle cell crisis, stroke, traumatic brain injury."

Again, sounds like a panacea, in a "universal" sense.


I am as concerned as when I read about ND Zampieron's injections of 'homeopathic voodoo juice' into on that minor.

Is this allowed?

And of course, the ethical question is, if it is NOT permitted:

if it shouldn't be done, what should I do?

I have to abide by the medical code of ethics, including its 'snitch clause'.

So, I'm trying to find out if hyperbaric panacea's are allowed.

Now, the FDA has an interesting article up online, "Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy: Don't Be Misled", wherein the FDA states:

"do a quick search on the Internet, and you'll see all kinds of claims for these and other diseases for which the [HBOT] device has not been cleared or approved by FDA [...] HBOT has not [...] been proven to be the kind of universal treatment it has been touted to be on some internet sites [...] hyperbaric oxygen therapy [...] has not been clinically proven to cure or be effective in the treatment of cancer, autism, or diabetes [...] patients may be unaware that the safety and effectiveness of HBOT has not been established for these diseases and conditions [...] AIDS/HIV, Alzheimer's disease, asthma, Bell's palsy, brain injury, cerebral palsy, depression, heart disease, hepatitis, migraine, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, sport's injury, stroke [...] 'patients may incorrectly believe that these devices have been proven safe and effective for uses not cleared by FDA, which may cause them to delay or forgo proven medical therapies' says Nayan Patel, a biomedical engineer in FDA's Anesthesiology Devices Branch."

Several of those diseases or conditions were on the list.

We're also warned by the FDA:

"hyperbaric chambers are medical devices that require FDA clearance. FDA clearance of a device for a specific use means FDA has reviewed valid scientific evidence supporting that use and determined that the device is at least as safe and effective as another legally U.S.-marketed device."

So, my take is that if a device is being used for non-approved purposes, then the people involved are being treated experimentally.

And there's a whole bunch of important ethical strictures and permissions that are FEDERALLY REQUIRED within such a context.

I think I have found a violation of FDA guidelines at ND Brady and Co.'s practice.

So, I've decided to alert the FDA, and I've asked for clarity on the matter.

Actually, at the end of this Part Two, I'm going to list three Connecticut NDs that I'm complaining to the FDA about, or that I'm inquiring about by way of the FDA, including ND Zampieron and ND Breiner of DC-ND Brady's practice.

Now, it's possible I'll be told they're fine and such.

But, I'm checking with FDA anyway, in the name of due diligence, because I see pictures on the Facebook page of DC-ND Brady's practice with children in an HBOT machine.

Actually, on the Facebook page for the practice, there are MANY pictures of people in HBOT machines and posts lauding it for MANY conditions.

We're told, in the captions on these pictures, such things as:

"hyperbaric oxygen has been scientifically proven to promote healing after concussion [...] HBOT can help treat [...] traumatic brain injury and more [...] not sure what hyperbaric oxygen therapy is? Find out more information here and set up your first appointment today [...] hyperbaric oxygen therapy is viable alternative to help ease autism especially in younger patients. Find out how WholeBodyMed can help you or a loved one [...] hyperbaric oxygen therapy can help you heal faster. Learn more about this unique healing technique today [...] everyone knows that oxygen is essential to life. But did you know that it can also help treat diabetes patients? [...] tick season in in full swing. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy can help with the prevention and treatment of Lyme disease. Contact us for more information [...] hyperbaric oxygen therapy treats numerous neurological conditions including migraines, chronic fatigue, and Lyme disease [...] hyperbaric oxygen therapy is offered at Whole-Body Medicine. HBOT treats numerous conditions using the healing power of oxygen that include stroke, traumatic brain injuries, Lyme disease and more [...] hyperbaric oxygen therapy can help heal wounds and treat conditions like autism and brain injury."

Meanwhile, the list of what HBOT actually is known to help with, and therefore is allowed to be used for is much smaller, and those issues are much more acute.

Johns Hopkins Medicine tells us in "Complications of Hyperbaric Oxygen Treatment", that HBOT is known to help:

"carbon monoxide poisoning, cyanide poisoning, injury from crushing, gas gangrene [...] decompression sickness, acute or traumatic inadequate blood flow in the arteries, select wound healing, skin grafts and flaps, infection in a bone called osteomyelitis, delayed radiation injury, flesh-eating disease [...] air or gas embolism [...] actinomycosis, diabetic wounds."

But, there's actually a risk-benefit consideration with HBOT, because we're also told that there's risk of:

“damage to the lungs, buildup of fluid or rupture of the middle ear, damage to the sinuses, changes in vision causing nearsightedness or myopia, oxygen poisoning."

So, if patients are being treated with something that doesn't work, which simultaneously carries significant risk, well, aren't we then really witnessing quite THE UNETHICAL.

ND Brady's “Healthy Revolution” Book:

FINALLY, the revolution is upon us!

Well, not really:

the book was published in 2007, a long wait for a revolution that hasn't arrived.

I'm still waiting for the revolution, the 'integrative revolution'.

Actually, if you use Google's Trends tool to measure “interest”, and you put in “integrative” and “naturopathic”, you actually find stagnancy and diminishment in terms of news headlines, respectively, for each, NOT INCREASE.

Time to rebrand the WOO, DC-ND Brady.

The timer has run out on THIS iteration.

Anyway, years ago I'd bought and scanned this ND Brady book titled:

"Dr. Brady's Healthy Revolution: What You Really Need to Know to Stay Healthy in a Sick World".

A sick world, that's rather alarming.

The book is linked to at, on DC-ND Brady's profile page [2015 archived].

Its year of publication was 2007 and it's at

Its ISBNs are 1600370810 and 978-1600370816.

And on its back cover, we get a bio. of ND Brady that foregoes mention of his chiropractic credential.

We're also told there that the publisher is Morgan-James, which is reportedly, possibly or apparently, a kind of vanity press.

Wikipedia confirms that the publisher, Morgan-James, is a “vanity press model”.

And that's interesting: A REVOLUTION, according to DC-ND Brady, that needs to be artificially revolved, so to speak? 

I may be wrong, but, it doesn't seem that publishers were beating down DC-ND Brady's door, if he self-published.

Like it doesn't seem likely Randy Alvarez INVITED DC-ND Brady to be interviewed if the program was "paid."

The Revolution will be advertised!

I'll now recount how I'd left a brief or partial five-star review of the book at in 2008, which is still up.

Oh, how time flies!

It did NOT please DC-ND Brady, who personally responded.

I wrote:

“this ND's book is an excellent example of homeopathy's underpinning and keystone vitalistic 'article of faith.' This sectic belief is also known as animatism, animism, dualism etc.: I term it, overall per naturopathy's belief-set particularly, a 'purposeful life spirit' figmentation / a sectarian premise [hugely autoentheistic, by the way]. Visit the Oregon Board of Naturopathic Examiners for further iteration of such vitalism [and supernaturalism, and teleology] falsely claimed as able to survive scientific scrutiny [blatant .gov pseudoscience]. Visit the University of Bridgeport -- the author of this book's alma mater, and his employer, and the ND school I attended -- for false claims that their requisite naturopathic sectarian 'purposeful life spirit' belief-set is scientific [so much for academic duty and truthfulness]. NOTE: OBNE, like naturopathy en masse -- including the AANP-AANMC schools consortia -- is in quite a fraudulent position: science has profoundly ejected the vitalistic, the supernatural-spiritistic, and the teleological [and kind], yet AANP-AANMC falsely claims that such is, in fact, able to survive scientific scrutiny. I quote Dr. Brady, ND, DC, from this book he wrote [he was a classmate in ND homeopathy courses at UB; BTW, the unethical position of naturopathy overall is why I left without graduating]: 'homeopaths believe that illness of the body is fundamentally due to a distunement of the person's energy or life-force [...] bad constitution or life force [...] the innate life force. Homeopathic remedies are prescribed in order to retune [p.144] the vital force by imparting a specific energy into the body [...] an energy that would perfectly match the person's vital energy [...] this resonance, or matching, of the energy frequency of the remedy and the vital-force is therefore given to reset the vital force [p.145...and TCM is based on] theories of the flow of energy and life-force within the body, including a balancing of the competitive energy forces of yin and yang [p.149...] energy (or 'chi / qi' [p.150].' -r.c.”

I was being factual, of course, concise.

My rating is based on his content accuracy, in terms of representing certain quack ideas.

I'd added to that comment.

I stated, while providing links to my compilations:

“naturopathy's 'life force' is as 'in fact scientific' as the Tooth Fairy.  For naturopathy's essential vitalism, visit .  For the essential nonscientific status of vitalism & kind, see . For naturopathy's claims that they (and such) are science-based / scientific / medical science anyway [!!!], see .  'Danger, Will Robinson...pseudoscience!!!!'  For the medical profession's ethical code pertaining to 'the integrity & appropriate use of scientific knowledge,' see .  Visit too: '10 Fraudulent Years On - My UB, AANP-Alliance, FNPLA Naturopathy Education,' a commemoration of the unprofessional, pseudoscientific, 'sectarian medicine' deception I experienced.'  Oh crap, this naturopathy is a fraudulent / unethical premise and they've been tricking a lot of people over the years into thinking they abide by the professional strictures of academic and medical science, when in fact they live in a cloud cuckoo-land. Wish they hadn't diverted me from something else, like actual medicine. I wouldn't owe all this student loan monies towards this unethical crap, and damn it, I've lost the income of a career in medicine.'”

Such comments apparently didn't make DC-ND Brady all that happy, because, in response, he wrote:

“this review is obviously by a person with some sort of personal ax to grind and his review has nothing to do with the book.  The book is not about homeopathy, or even naturopathy. It is about a lot of general topics related to health and wellness and describes and discussed many different approaches and professions.  I would encourage all to disregard this review as entirely inappropriate.”

Now, that's his edited version.

The original version that went up began:

“this review is by a deranged person obviously with a personal ax to grind...”

Well I don't see anything personal in my comments, actually.

I'm talking about ideas, I'm talking about the naturopathic perspective, I'm talking about what they learn.

I guess DC-ND Brady thinks it's about him.

DC-ND Brady must have change his mind about THAT language.

So, I guess I'm a 'deranged assassin', if I combine the insults of NDs Zampieron and Brady.

But I'm NOT the one hoodwinking.

Oh, how values are so reversed in Naturopathyland.

To his response, I responded:

“Hmmmmm: the author comments!  How exciting [though confusing]!  I'd gotten an email from Amazon that contains different [let's say] 'judgmental verbiage' than what is now written above by Dr. Brady.  Perhaps the author may edit it again, in the future.  So, I'll be careful to quote what I'll then comment upon.  In that version, I was labeled 'deranged.'  I've saved the email with that other-than-what's-above language, FYI.  I save everything!  And this response itself is not my original, as I'd first responded to that original-now-gone.  I may share the whole process on Naturocrit.  What can you do!  Amazon doesn't lock entries, a situation that I'm very neutral about anyway.  And just for the record, my original post regarding this book is what has been up for so long:  I haven't changed it in like four years.  I'm again, excited hearing from the actual author of a book I've commented upon. There are tons of books I've commented upon, and this is the first time I've had an author reply.  Here's to Web 2.0, and here's to informed consent, wherein the public makes decisions about things-medical-and-health-related after becoming appraised of ALL the relevant details.  First I'll comment upon my original posting:  I wouldn't change a thing.  Now, I'll comment upon the 2012 situation and what the author has said:

a) 2012:  This is an interesting year for naturopathy, particularly.  You have the 2011 withdrawal of public funding for the nonsense in the UK.  Presently, you have the Australian scene wherein Friends of Science in Medicine are making quite an impact on Australian national education policy [e.g., naturopathy is a B.S. in Oz, and one of its centerpieces is IRIDOLOGY!  That's akin to paying for a horse and some guy saddles up a mouse and tells you to hit the road: have you no SHAME?].  Canada, too, has something BIG goings [sic.] on:  homeopathy, central to North American naturopathy which poses it as a 'science' even on their board exams, is under siege for being inert sugar pills falsely promising medicinal effect to the tune of a $30 million dollar class action lawsuit [see Skeptic North].

b) what has been said:  I'm wondering if the first efforts of the author were actually towards Amazon.  I applaud Amazon if it has supported my right to an expert opinion pertaining to this product they sell [and its overall context; I've been studying naturopathy and CAM / for more than 15 years], and for not caving in to an author's whining about LEGITIMATE and FAIR criticism.  I don't engage in libel.  My argumentation is not 'to the man', because I'm more educated than that.  I'm interested in claims about reality, and if they are actual as opposed to bogus sectarian figmentation.

So, the author has said [in case it changes, I repeat and this I will video-screen-capture]:  'this review is obviously by a person with some sort of personal ax to grind and his review has nothing to do with the book. The book is not about homeopathy, or even naturopathy.  It is about a lot of general topics related to health and wellness and describes and discussed many different approaches and professions. I would encourage all to disregard this review as entirely inappropriate.'

A response:

i) Yes, I have an axe to grind. My point of view is from the experiences I had going through naturopathy school and how that compares to what is actual / true.  I consider whistle-blowing and informing the public in the face of inaccuracy and manipulation to be my axe [much like the axe that Watson and Crick swung when they discovered DNA's structure, and destroyed the medieval idea of vitalism / dualism].  Perhaps this is otherwise known as enlightenment and populism:  the axe that grinds against ignorance and irrationality [and fraud] is SCIENCE.  I completely disagree with the idea that this is personal, though.  I comment and respond to 'the naturopathic' and pseudoscience across many sources and in many forums [public, regulatory, etc.].  Sorry, you are not that special: I never was impressed [the Ferraro AK especially made things, let's say, surreal].

ii) If I quote directly from your book, and then talk about that and the context of the credentials that you possess that allow you to author-the-book with 'expertise' as a 'Dr.' ['naturopathic' is on the back cover, FFS; including what I quoted, and I remember being taught the same stuff from the same instructor and I think you were also in that classroom as a student], then I believe I have DIRECTLY reviewed an aspect of your book and you stating 'nothing to do' is bunk.  I never claimed to be comprehensive about your book.  Again, how is something I write about directly stated in your book 'nothing to do with the book'?  IT'S IN THE BOOK.  I've OCR'd the book, and it's in my hand, too.

I enjoy the couple pages on naturopathy.  You state:

'there are naturopathic doctors who are comprehensively trained in diagnosis and natural-based treatment of a broad scope of disorders, and then there are those who do not receive the training I feel merits the designation doctor [...]';

[My response was:] Since when is being indoctrinated that that which is within science is the same as that which is outside of science....'comprehensive'?  And you say the book isn't about naturopathy, yet there are more than two pages dedicated to the subject and it's on the back cover?  Do you think we are all idiots or something?

[Concerning Brady's statement:] '[NDs are] some of the best trained doctors when it comes to diagnosing and treating a broad range of health concerns [...]';

[My response was:] Except for the fact that NDs have been trained in absurdity: that a scientific fact and a figmentation are the same thing.

[Concerning DC-ND Brady's statement:] 'it is often hard to determine correct treatment for a patient when you do not possess the knowledge or legal authority to diagnose patients [...] I would recommend that you see a healthcare clinician with a license to diagnose [...]'
[My response:] I'll say.  Being a licensed falsehood makes things so much easier, though.

[Concerning Brady's statement:] 'a CNME-accredited four year naturopathic medical school [...]';

[My response was:] YES! Wherein homeopathy, chi, reiki, craniosacral therapy, subluxations and what-not are claimed as scientifically supported since the claim is science subset naturopathy subset all-those-things.

iii) The book supposedly is 'not about naturopathy or homeopathy?'  You are a chiropractor and a naturopath, and both allow you to be called 'doctor' [credentials you don't care to share on the cover of your book, I believe] and to market the book in a certain way.  My quote is about homeopathy, which is directly a subset of naturopathy AND IN THE BOOK.  And naturopathy which is IN THE BOOK FALSELY poses nonscience as science, ALL THE TIME.  Are you kidding me?  It's as absurd as a multimillionaire presidential candidate stating to regular Joes that he's also unemployed.

iv) Regarding being 'inappropriate', they also said that it was inappropriate to mention that the Emperor was naked.  I encourage all readers to not only read one side of a claim, but to also look at what scientific skepticism and critical thinking have to say.  And read the criticisms of that.  And then, as is said in Latin, cogita tute [think for yourself].  America is quite a 'Wild-West' when it comes to educational and consumer protection.  You may be deranged in the process 'of the naturopathic' [and I am admittedly deranged!].  And, isn't it kind of sad, that nobody but me has engaged with this book on this forum? -r.c.”

So, that's the end of my comment.

And, actually, in reviewing all this now, in 2015, I have NO REGRETS.

But, I'd forgotten how much I'd said, and I'm surprised it's still up there.

It's kind of buried by the comments of others now, which is fine.

Now, also in the book, there's this 'broad or categorical science subset what DC-ND Brady does' statement:

“[there's] the new paradigm: the new medicine […] this underlying current of change [...] a potential paradigm shift [...] a phenomena [p.159] referred to by many names: functional medicine, metabolic medicine, comprehensive medicine, and integrative medicine […] the movement of functional medicine is defined as 'a patient-centered, science-based health care that identifies and addresses underlying biochemical, physiological, environmental and psychological factors to reverse disease progression and enhance vitality […] by any name, it is a movement within the scientific-based health care community, including medical, chiropractic, and naturopathic doctors […it's] a very scientifically valid and research-based body of knowledge [p.160].'”

Again, WHERE is the change?

It's about eight years since the book was published, and the integrative is STAGNANT in terms of interest, according to Google Trends.

And the naturopathic is DIMINISHING.

Let me THINK, comprehensively, l about what “very scientifically valid” MEANS to DC-ND Brady, by way of the contents of his book, and what's within the UB programs he oversees – as in 'division of health sciences subset naturopathy subset homeopathy, vitalism, supernaturalism and kind'.

 I'd say that science is allowed to be ANYTHING in DC-ND Bradyland.


science subset nonscience blended with science, all termed science.

Here's another example from the book.

There's applied kinesiology in the book.

We're told:

“applied kinesiology […] it originated within the chiropractic profession […] while this system of muscle testing may seem esoteric and strange since it incorporates elements of energy and Eastern medicine, it can he very effective when performed by an adequately trained doctor […] it is suggested that you consider practitioners utilizing A.K. who have formal training and have received board certification in this method [...e.g.] the International College of Applied Kinesiology.”

But we know applied kinesiology is just junk.

By way of this statement I HOLISTICALLY as in GLOBALLY highly question the DC-ND's ability to judge what is and what isn't plausible, possible, reliable and nonsensical in terms of diagnostics.

It's like stating 'I only recommend CERTIFIED unicorn whisperers'.

So, that's a little about the book.

I should deal with something mentioned in one of those Randy Alvarez interviews, regarding DC-ND Brady's recommendations on exercise in the book.

DC-ND Brady begins with this reasonable observation:

“the health dangers of a sedentary lifestyle have been well documented amid publicized. Statistically speaking, most significant diseases of our time, including heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, and many others, are much more common in populations that are sedentary. Our economy and society have changed in many ways over the past several generations resulting in the promotion of sedentary lifestyles. The technological revolution has resulted in a new economy in which the typical job environment is one of sitting in front of a computer screen and talking on the telephone the majority of the day. Historically, this is a big departure from the physically demanding occupations of old such as farming, manufacturing, and construction jobs.”

And as I'd said, that's rather reasonable.

So, there's history being invoked again by DC-ND Brady, while, historically, homeopathy and kind are quite science-ejected but UB and North American naturopathy falsely terms them “science.”

How SELECTIVE  or narrow we can be about HISTORY.

If I haven't said it enough, being exceptionally narrow, in my view, is being sectarian.

Anyway, regarding exercise, we're told in the book:

“there is no better stress reducer than reasonable exercise […] an hour commitment several times a week is all it takes […] exercise needs to be a comfortable and enjoyable experience so you’ll want to continue exercising […] remember, moderation and having fun during physical activity is the key to healthy exercise […] get moderate exercise, but do not over-exercise.”

So, it turns out that what was talked about in that interview, that RADICAL idea of exercise, really doesn't resemble the predominant exercise recommendations in the book.

Talk about bullshit-hype.

The interview was rather bullshit-laden.

Though, in the book DC-ND Brady does write:

“I have also found short-burst interval training to be effective for those who do not have a great deal of time to exercise. New research has suggested that high-intensity short bursts of activity may have a greater overall training effect than 20 to 30 minutes of low-intensity aerobic activity.”

So that is some mention of that sort of burst training.

And THAT'S interesting too, listening to DC-ND Brady talk about paying attention to “new research.”

Yet why oh why does naturopathy IGNORE so much in terms of science, aka research, from the PAST SEVERAL DECADES???

And, of course, the book recommends supplements, supplements, supplements.

Here's an interesting fact from the book too.

DC-ND Brady warns about energy healing.

He writes:

“the latest trend for massage therapists is to emerge from a weekend seminar or two as healers. Many study an esoteric form of hands-off energy therapy called reiki. While I am not passing ultimate judgment on this technique and I am not a person who believes there is no potential benefit to various forms of energy based therapy, this trend troubles me a great deal. Once you read the section below on healers and intuitives I think you will have a better understanding of my thoughts in this regard. In any event, in my opinion, this sub-set of massage therapists are over-stepping their bounds in regard to their training and legal authority in attempting to diagnose and treat patients for a whole host of real or fictional health conditions. It is my advice that you avoid this type of therapist. Instead find a well trained massage therapist who confines themselves to the practice of massage and with whom you can have a good rapport.”

Which is interesting, because reiki and such is WITHIN UB health science.

If anything is ESOTERIC, it's the traditional Chinese medicine that UB's Division of Health Science terms "Masters of Health Science in Acupuncture", which I'll talk about a little later.

But regarding reiki, in "UB Knightlines Summer / Fall 2013", [2015 archived] we're told:

"cancer may be cellular in nature, but treatment of the disease should be far more expansive, advises College of Naturopathic Professor Jodi Noé in The Textbook of Naturopathic Integrative Oncology (CCNM Press). Written for medical school students and patients alike, Noé says patients can participate in their own healing by combining conventional allopathic drug, radiation, and surgical approaches with naturopathic, complementary, and alternative strategies. 'You can use chemo-radio treatments targeted specifically for each type of cancer at the genetic level, and also use reiki, acupuncture, nutrition, massage, yoga or qigong to support the patient' says Noé. Peter D’Adamo, an adjunct professor at UB’s Center for Excellence in Generative Medicine, wrote the forward."

Because anything goes, at Naturopathyland University.

And it is rather contradictory:

DC-ND Brady is FOR applied kinesiology, which is the same kind of “esoteric” shit.

And in the book I do believe, again, we are getting from DC-ND Brady an kind of 'anti-analysis' posture, when he states in the book:

"Western medicine relies on a very narrow minded paradigm based on reductionism [...] a very Western scientific, reductionist, and analytical way.”

And my response really is:

what the hell is wrong with analysis?

What the hell is wrong with a practitioner who does not want to know things in the best way possible?

Well, perhaps you WOULD say bad things about such analysis, as a naturopath and chiropractor, because such much of the essentially naturopathic and chiropractic is bullshit.

So much inside UB's division of health sciences is bullshit.

So, its a way to hedge illumination of such.

And here's a long quote the employs part of the previous quote I excerpted:

“Westerners are schooled and raised in a culture that only accepts the reductionist scientific model, which in clinical applications is based on the identification of the physical and biochemical pathways by which processes occur within the body, and by which something may therapeutically affect the body. Oriental medicine is not based on these principles.”

Now that FASCINATES me, because in that sentence, DC-ND Brady just exposed the RUSE of the UB degree termed Masters of Science in Acupuncture, UB's M.S.Ac.

What you have there is the science label in the degree upon what was just admitted as NOT science.

I also took a required course in the ND program which was Oriental Medicine, the ND program that claims to be science.


In fact, in “Master of Science in Acupuncture Degree Program Details” tells us:

“traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), which encompasses acupuncture, herbal therapy, manual therapy, diet counseling, exercise and breathing techniques, has been in use for thousands of years. Over the millennia, the Asian community has continuously refined this ancient healing art. During the last century, this refinement has included integration of Western medical sciences within the paradigm of TCM. The development of the Master of Science in Acupuncture degree program integrates the medical concepts of both the East and West. The student will learn modern and classical acupuncture and TCM medical theory as well as up-to-date western bio-medical sciences. The Master of Science in Acupuncture degree program’s goal is to provide acupuncture and TCM training consistent with the developing traditions on Asia and the growing modern health care system in the United States. Having an opportunity to work alone and in conjunction with other health care practitioners in the Health Sciences Center, the students will be able to integrate the care of patients with other health care providers. Thus, the student gains a 'real world' advantage before entering private practice.”

Now, if you read that carefully, this “science” is stated as NOT actually science.

They said it is within the TCM paradigm.

So it is 'medievalism subset science'.

It's 'the medieval falsely labeled science'.

I've often termed this 'science as the sword of sectarianism.'

Brady continues, in his book, concerning TCM:

“[TCM] is based more on the accumulated empirical observation of patients by oriental practitioners over thousands of years and on theories of the flow of energy and life-force within the body, including a balancing of the competitive energy forces of Yin and Yang. The whole subject of proper energy f1ow and its health ramifications, within the body has always been a difficult subject for Western medical scientists to comprehend. Since these theories and principles are very hard to quantify objectively in a laboratory, they have been traditionally rejected as hog wash by Western medicine. This, however, is changing rapidly and bioenergetic medicine is now one of the most cutting-edge areas in medical research along with genetic engineering. Many Western scientists are predicting that the further understanding of how energy is created, resonates and flows within individual cells and throughout the body will represent the next great frontier of medicine.”

I feel like saying 'keep your eye on the ball', as you watch this shell game.

Oh how conflated and FALSE we are.

In so many ways.

Empiricism is not science, though it is a step in that direction.

Life force is science-ejected, and it's NOT REQUIRED to explain anything in biology.

ALL ENERGY has been accounted for, in terms of thermodynamics, and the physicalistic and material causalistic nature of life is QUITE LOCKED DOWN.

To then say, basically, 'life force medicine is “cutting-edge” science is HILARIOUS.

This is the ABUSE of the term energy:

in some places in that quote it is used as what exists in science, and in some places in that quote it is used as what exists in terms of figmentation, as in what doesn't exist.

And let me talk about RACISM.

I find it INSULTING, as a humanist and someone who has a broad education, to read these labels of “Western” knowledge and “Oriental [...or] Asian" knowledge.

It reeks of special pleading, of a kind of posed unspannable difference.

As if there isn't an objective world that we all are equally sharing.

As if we are to turn off our minds and accept 'the other' in an unqualified manner.

It's quite hypocritical.

I'm sure DC-ND Brady would be critical of medieval blood-letting and such in the Western Galenic tradition.

Why can't the same critical rules be applied to Chinese medievalism.

It reeks of a kind of condescension, the creation of special circumstances, an epistemic charity.

And therein for me such abuse strikes me as racist or culturalist, or something along those lines.

And DC-ND Brady brands modern medicine “allopathic” in the book.

That's always a sign of what I'll term 'healthcare sectarianism', wherein a false equation is being made by a healthcare sectarian that 'well, it's all sectarian.'

We're told:

“conventional allopathic medicine [...] the standard allopathic model of healthcare […] the allopathic way of thinking […] the hallowed ivy-covered towers and halls of academic allopathic medicine […] allopathic medicine is the type of conventional or standard medicine we have all become familiar with in Western countries. This system of medicine almost exclusively relies on drugs and surgery to relieve symptoms.”

But that term, “allopathic”, was created by homeopathy's founder, Hahnemann, and it's entirely NOT appropriate to use as a label for modern medicine.

It's like calling current chemistry alchemy, or current astronomy, astrology.

It's just nonsense.

And again, a big swipe at conventional medicine, claiming it is negligent in not getting to the root of problems, only treating “symptoms.”

I disagree.

A doctor would be in very hot water if they gave someone a sedative in the ED instead of the antibiotic they need to treat their life-threatening infection.

And I pick that example on purpose.

DC-ND Brady said that 'they only treat symptoms', which are the patient's experiences.

So just making them feel better, while they have a life-threatening infection, would be quite absurd.

Again, they speak as if ALL problems are symptoms.

What about SIGNS?

What about objective measurements!

Again, I find it very anti-analytical.

What about the thing itself, which is what standard of care requires a doctor to treat.

And I'll state this again:

no matter what the shortcomings are of conventional medicine, that doesn't justify naturopathy's falsehoods.

To pose such is to entertain a logical fallacy.

But my most favorite thing about DC-ND Brady is what he did in front of the Connecticut legislature in 2014.

A Big Fat Falsehood by DC-ND Brady to the Connecticut Legislature:

In April of 2015, I'd posted at the Naturocrit blog “ND Brady 2014 Testimony: Wherein Senator Gerratana's PHC Gets a Big Fat Falsehood”.

The document in question is a transcript titled “PH Committee Hearing Transcript for 03/14/2014” [2015 archived].

You can find it with a search: brady science absolutely.

So, this is the Public Health Committee of the Connecticut Legislature.

And they don't seem too bright.

They seem easily misled.

The document lists the legislators present.

"chairmen: Senator Gerratana, Representative Johnson [...members] Senators: Holder-Winfield, Kane, Musto, Slossberg, Welch; Representatives: Arconti, Betts, Cook, Conroy, Davis, Demicco, Hovey, Klarides, Maroney, P. Miller, Perillo, Riley, Ryan, Sayers, Scribner, Srinivasan, Tercyak, Widlitz, Zoni, Ziobron."

ND Brady spoke.

If it's called a “hearing”, it may be accurate to say he testified, but I don't think it was under oath and I don't think it's considered a courtroom.

Yet, I don't think the legislature likes it when it is told a big fat falsehood.

Even if, I get the impression, they are NOT savvy enough to actually be able to vet what they are hearing with very easily accessible information in real or near-real time.

In other words, they appear to me to be a bunch of credulous clueless politicians posing rigor, posing contextual knowledge, in the very important “public health” area.

ND Brady stated to that Public Health Committee:

"the licensed naturopathic physician attends a doctoral-level, four-year naturopathic medical school, and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an MD [...using] approaches which emphasize prevention and upstream medical intervention using all evidence-based tools [...] we take rigorous national exams called NPLEX."

And it is the NPLEX that falsely labels homeopathy and kind a "clinical science."

And I would hugely argue that since anything-is-science in naturopathy, the concept of what science is IS NOT the "same" as what happens generally in education OVERALL.

DC-ND Brady also said:

"in the end, what we're asking for is nothing more than fairness and equity as a profession [...] the modern naturopathic medical profession."

Ah, the of-the-professions claim.

But have you ever heard of a profession based upon falsehoods?

Senator Gerratana, to co-chair, asked:

"do you follow in your curriculum at the University of Bridgeport, do you follow evidence-based science in your studies and your curriculum work?"

ND Brady responded:

"of course, yeah [...] our program is an evidence-based curriculum [...] an evidence-based curriculum."

Senator Gerratana sought clarity, asking:

"it's a scientific evidence-based curriculum?"

ND Brady's response was:

"yes, absolutely."

I'll put a screen capture of that dialog in the transcript.

Can you believe, he said 'YES categorically, absolutely'!

And that is SO EASY to show as FALSE.

So, what a betrayal of truth.

And what a bunch of credulous dotes listening to him.

Just taking homeopathy alone, you CAN'T absolutely say naturopathy is based on science, that homeopathy is within science.

In the end, obviously, DC-ND Brady is, and I've been waiting to use this pun for a while, a very skilled MANIPULATOR:

by way of his chiropractic background onward into naturopathy licensed falsehood.

And this is the guy who wants to be the primary care provider in function, the rheumatologist in function, the gastroenterologist in function, for the very vulnerable chronically ill.

Quackery is alive and well in Connecticut, abetted by Connecticut's own DOTING elected officials.

I have one more bit before I conclude this episode.

There Are Three Connecticut NDs I'm Complaining About to FDA and Others:

There are, I believe, certain kinds of egregious infractions and dubious behaviors happening in Connecticut by way of LICENSED naturopaths.

In fact, I believe licensure of naturopathy leads to 'egregious and dubious behaviors with impunity.'

That's the point:

absurdity has no problem with absurdity, aka naturopaths have no problem with naturopathy.

 That's the licensure scene for naturopathy.

That's the comfort that licensure gives naturopathy.

Medicine, and I mean modern biomedicine overall, has very strong ethical strictures, though naturopathy doesn't.

Having such, would, I believe, dissolve naturopathy, because it is inherently unethical and irrational, pseudoscientific and opaquely manipulative.

As the American Board of Internal Medicine's Physician Charter, which naturopathy hasn't endorsed and doesn't have to abide by, states:

“as members of a profession, physicians are expected to work collaboratively to maximize patient care, be respectful of one another, and participate in the processes of self-regulation, including remediation and discipline of members who have failed to meet professional standards […] these obligations include engaging in internal assessment and accepting external scrutiny of all aspects of their professional performance […] physicians have a duty to uphold scientific standards, to promote research, and to create new knowledge and ensure its appropriate use. The profession is responsible for the integrity of this knowledge, which is based on scientific evidence and physician experience.”

So, that's scientific integrity, professionalism, and scrutiny.

Now, I'm not a physician, but I am, as a medical assistant and allied health instructor, obligated similarly and request, from regulators, “external scrutiny” of naturopathy.

It is what naturopathy ethically NEEDS.

DC-ND Brady HAD said, at that CT Public Health hearing:

"in the end, what we're asking for is nothing more than fairness and equity as a profession [...] the modern naturopathic medical profession."

I say:

“may you get what you ask for.”

Because what's sauce for the goose...

Fairness and equality means:

the same scientific standards, the same ethical standards, the same professional standards.

Isn't that what it means by UNIVERSITY?

You are to be broad, compliant, of highest rigor especially when you are a supposed doctoral program.

This Fall 2015 is a strange confluence:

I'm teaching.

I'm a full-time health care teacher who trains adults to work for physicians, and my current courses are:

Pharmacology, Anatomy and Physiology, Clinical 1, and Medical Law and Ethics.

And I wonder if that HYPERsensitizes me to the stuff I've been reading by NDs and seeing done by NDs in CT.

So, I've submitted a complaint to the FDA and others.

For what it's worth.

Overarching, there's the whole BLATANT academic fraud thing going on at UB in terms of academic commerce, that likely will never be where it should be:

in a court, found as fraud, found to be a gross violation of consumer protections, and therefore restitutions.

That overarching fraud sets up the laxity that then results in naturopaths injecting ad hoc homeopathic voodoo juice into minors:

because when science is anything without ethical strictures, there's both permission and confidence for such activity.

Welcome to Dachau.

There's this very weird conflict of interest, what I'll call 'subjective enmeshment', of the overseeing NBME or BNME in relation to the NDs and the Connecticut naturopathy activities and ideas they oversee.

Complain about naturopathy, and naturopaths get the complaint, and because they are trained in absurd things as quite permissible, when you have naturopaths look at their absurdity, they find no absurdity, they find no problem.

They find home.

They find Naturopathyland.

And there's specifically what three NDs are apparently doing, by way of their web pages and books, which I will now detail.

I'll say 'apparently' for them because I don't see posted documentation supporting these activities as FDA approved or FDA permitted.

There's ND Zampieron's recounted:

use of equipment, EDS [and darkfield], in a non-FDA approved manner on patients;

trials on human subjects with no mention of FDA registration, approval, and ethical oversight at his practice;

and there's individual ad hoc experimentation on minors with what I've termed 'injected homeopathic voodoo juices' that the ND has invented and compounded and apparently administered at his practice.

I said "minors" there, if you notice.

Now, I didn't' mention this in Part 1, but, that patient Yvonne who received those 'injected homeopathic voodoo juices', as described in Part 1, is recounted at the time in the book as being only 13 years old.

As the first edition recounted on the page 217 heading:

"success story: auto-sanguis therapy calms the autoimmune reaction: Yvonne, 13 [...with] juvenile rheumatoid arthritis."

And on p.218 it is termed:

"injectible auto-sanguis dilution therapy."

I find this to be most disturbing.

Even in 2004, at, we were told concerning this book's contents, including whatever he's injecting:

“arthritis: reverse underlying causes of arthritis with clinically proven alternative therapies”


As regards DC-ND Brady's practice, there's:

ND Breiner specifically, the ND he works with, who is apparently using equipment, those oxygen pressure chambers, in an non-FDA approved manner.

It would be interesting to know how much referral between the two NDs has gone on.

And I'm going to throw in one more ND who is using EDS as some kind of diagnostic and remedy maker and adjuster, which is not what those machines are permitted to be used for.

ND Ingels, a Bastyr ND graduate, on the page "Ingels Family Health Southport,CT" tells us:

"non-invasive allergy assessment [...] Dr. Ingels utilizes the Orion, a non-invasive computer-based electrodermal screening instrument which measures changes in skin conductance. The Orion is a computer-based method of evaluating sensitivities to many different substances including foods, inhalants [...] and chemicals. It was first developed by a German physician more than 50 years ago, but currently utilizes state-of-the-art technology combining the principles of computer engineering and quantum physics."

He lists this as also being done at his New York and California offices.

And of course, this being naturopathy, we're also told there:

"homeopathy [...] this form of treatment is preferred for children due to effectiveness."

Again, major bullshit.

I will include in this episode's transcript the letter of compliant I'd sent:


To Whom it May Concern,

            I'm concerned about possible non-permitted clinical activity in Connecticut, for diagnosis and treatment, involving devices used by three practitioners at three different locations, in cumulatively three different states.  I am a writer who is soon to publish on this matter, and I thought I'd check these things with FDA:

I. First, there's hyperbaric oxygen chamber usage by a naturopath, for a host of conditions:

The naturopath's name is Adam Breiner


a licensed Connecticut naturopath


On ND Breiner's practice bio. page, the first link above, we're told:

                        “Dr. Breiner is the first physician in the State of Connecticut to offer hyperbaric oxygen for the treatment of Lyme, Stroke, ADD, Tramua [sic.], and other neurological conditions.”

On ND Breiner's page “Hyperbaric Oxygen & Neurologic Center”


we're told:

            “At Whole-Body Medicine we offer patients access to a cutting-edge, integrative Hyperbaric & Neurologic Center. Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy is used to help patients in their recovery from a wide range of neurological and other health challenges.”

On ND Breiner's page “Conditions Treated By HBOT”


we're told:

            “Below are some of the many conditions that can be treated by HBOT: autism, acute necrotizing fasciitis, anoxic ischemic encephalopathy, carbon monoxide intoxication, cerebral palsy, chronic fatigue, coma, cranial nerve syndrome, Crohn’s disease, decompression illness, gas gangrene, lepromatous leprosy, Lyme disease, multiple sclerosis, migraine, poor wound healing, peripheral neuropathy, post surgical repair of ligaments and tendons, radiation osteonecrosis, reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), sickle cell crisis, stroke, traumatic brain injury.”

I have underlined, in the quotes above, the WIDE usage / efficacy that is claimed for HBOT by ND Breiner.

Now, FDA has a page titled “Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy: Don't Be Misled”


which states:

            “HBOT has not, however, been proven to be the kind of universal treatment it has been touted to be on some Internet sites. FDA is concerned that some claims made by treatment centers using HBOT may give consumers a wrong impression that could ultimately endanger their health.  'Patients may incorrectly believe that these devices have been proven safe and effective for uses not cleared by FDA, which may cause them to delay or forgo proven medical therapies,' says Nayan Patel, a biomedical engineer in FDA's Anesthesiology Devices Branch. 'In doing so, they may experience a lack of improvement and/or worsening of their existing condition(s).' Patients may be unaware that the safety and effectiveness of HBOT has not been established for these diseases and conditions, including: AIDS/HIV, Alzheimer's disease, asthma, Bell's palsy, brain injury, cerebral palsy, depression, heart disease, hepatitis, migraine, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, sport's injury, stroke.  Patel says that FDA has received 27 complaints from consumers and health care professionals over the past three years about treatment centers promoting the hyperbaric chamber for uses not cleared by the agency […] hyperbaric chambers are medical devices that require FDA clearance. FDA clearance of a device for a specific use means FDA has reviewed valid scientific evidence supporting that use  and determined that the device is at least as safe and effective as another legally U.S.-marketed device.”

I see many things on this FDA list which the ND claims 'he treats / are treatable' with HBOT.

Along with this letter is a ZIP folder with screen captures from Facebook.

The Facebook account is for the naturopath's practice in Fairfield, CT.

Some pictures depict patients within the chamber, including a minor, and the ND is outside supervising the treatment.

Captions cast a wide net as to what the device can treat.

I'm interested in knowing if what's going on is acceptable to the FDA.

What ND Breiner is doing may very-well be approved and above-board, but I don't see posted on his practice page any kind of FDA permissions or variances for what seems to be FDA-restricted activity.

Here is a partial list of other NDs using HBOT in various states:

            NDs Dick-Kronenberg and Potenza

            NMDs Ramsey and Brouwer

            ND Ruhland

            NDs Bankole and Preston

            ND Cavaiola

            ND Shohet

            NDs Abfall and Borden

            ND Sarvestani

II. Second, there's the use of an electrodermal screening device and darkfield microscope for diagnostic purposes by ND Zampieron at his practice in Connecticut:

ND Zampieron is a CT licensed naturopath


who has been in continuous practice for the past couple of decades.

His web site is, where there is no mention of EDS or electrodermal, or darkfield.

But, there is a 2006 book he co-authored, “Arthritis: An Alternative Medicine Definitive Guide”

(see ).

Describing in the book what he does at his practice, with co-author RN Kamhi, we're told such things as:

            “alternative medicine diagnostic tests: electrodermal […] electrodermal screening (EDS): we use electrodermal screening to determine where to start the protocol of intervention for the arthritis patient […] arthritis is a multifaceted illness […] instead, we use EDS testing to prioritize which system in the patient's body needs attention first. By quickly pinpointing problems, EDS can indicate the degree of stress that is affecting an organ and prevent unnecessary guesswork testing. As a cross-reference, specific blood, urine, and stool analyses can then be ordered to confirm electrodermal results [p.056...] if EDS indicates that a person has a specific type of parasite [...] EDS can also help to select an individualized treatment protocol  for each person based on their sensitivities to certain natural medicines or supplements. In EDS, a blunt, noninvasive electric probe is placed at specific points on the patient hands, face, or feet, corresponding to acupuncture points at the beginning or end of energy meridians. Minute electrical discharges from these points serve as information signals about the condition of the body's organs and systems. The key idea with EDS is that it is a 'data acquisition process' in which the trained practitioner conducts an 'interview' with the patient's organs and tissues [...] electrodermal screening probes specific points on the hands (see black dots above) to gather information about the health, function, or possible toxicity of organs and body systems. These points are part of acupuncture meridians [p.057...] gathering information about the basic functional status of those systems and their energy pathways. As such, EDS is an investigational, not diagnostic, device because it requires the practitioner's knowledge of acupuncture, physiology, and therapeutic substances to interpret the energy imbalances, establish their precise focus, and select the most appropriate therapeutic response. EDS uses a scale of zero to 100, with 45-55 being 'normal' or 'balanced.' Readings above 55 are interpreted as indicating an inflammation of the organ associated with the meridian tested, while readings below 45-50 suggest organ stagnation and degeneration. The practitioners task is to find a single substance or combination of substances that will bring the EDS reading back close to 50. When  working with arthritis patients, we measure painful joints. These areas of sensitivity typically score around 85 or higher on the test. Then we try different substances, such as glucosamine sulfate and other nutrients, to balance the reading to 50. The nutrients that are successful at lowering the reading are then used in future supplementation for the patient [...a photo of the process is captioned] Ellen Kamhi, Ph.D., R.N., H.N.C., performs electrodermal screening on a patient [p.058...other effective and more convenient tests for identifying allergens, or allergy-causing substances, include applied kinesiology, electrodermal screening, the IgG ELISA test, blood typing, and skin testing [p.069...]electrodermal screening (EDS): electrodermal screening  is widely used by holistic practitioners in Europe and the United States to screen for a wide range of allergens, including food and environmental substances. It determines what remedies to use to properly neutralize allergic reactions as well as monitors the success of prescribed remedies [p.070... ] additional alternative medicine screening tools to diagnose the presence of parasites include electrodermal screening (EDS), applied kinesiology, and darkfield microscopic blood analysis [p.158...] electrodermal screening (EDS) is a form of computerized information gathering which is based on physics, not chemistry. A blunt, noninvasive electric probe is placed at specific points on the patient's hands, face, or feet, corresponding to acupuncture points at the beginning or end of energy meridians. Minute electrical discharges from these points serve as information signals about the condition of the body's organs and systems, useful for the physician in evaluation and developing a treatment plan. EDS can indicate the degree of stress that is affecting an organ and can monitor the progress of therapy, avoiding trial and error and general guesswork. EDS can use a computerized list or vials containing specimens of various parasites to test the meridians of the patient; if parasites are a factor, there will be a   corresponding weakened EDS reading [p.159]."

I suspect a lot of EDS diagnostic activity at ND Zampieron's practice, by way of these accounts.

Additionally, in terms of darkfield microscopy, we're told such things as:

            "we also performed a darkfield microscopic analysis of Vanessa's blood. We could see in the projected image of her blood many long, unidentified tubules, which we have found to correlate with the presence of parasites [p.23]."

Darkfield as a term actually occurs in the book at least 28 times.

I think the title of the post “Electrodermal Testing Part I: Fooling Patients with a Computerized Magic Eight Ball” at


says it all, concerning EDS.

As for darkfield microscopy, we're told in “The Pseudoscience of Live Blood Cell Analysis”


by the Committee for Skeptical inquiry:

            “take a simple scientific fact or term, build an elaborate fantasy on top of it, promote it, and you have pseudoscience. Live blood cell analysis by darkfield microscopy is an example. It sounds like a legitimate and valuable evidence-based diagnostic procedure; it is not.”

Again, I suspect these two devices are being used for diagnostic purposes while, apparently, not approved for such activity due to their inherent lack of a basis in reality.

I will return to ND Zampieron's practice in IV. in this letter, because I suspect something even more disturbing than EDS and darkfield pseudodiagnostics has occurred / could regularly occur there.

III. Third, there's the use of an electrodermal screening device for diagnostic purposes by ND Ingels in Southport, CT, New York State, and California:

ND Ingels is a Connecticut licensed naturopath


His practice is, with practice sites in the states of CT, NY, and CA


ND Ingels explains, in all three states


he does:

            “non-invasive allergy assessment […] Dr. Ingels utilizes the Orion®, a non-invasive computer- based electrodermal screening instrument which measures changes in skin conductance. The Orion® is a computer-based method of evaluating sensitivities to many different substances including foods, inhalants (pollens, molds, animal danders) and chemicals. It was first developed by a German physician more than 50 years ago, but currently utilizes state-of-the-art technology combining the principles of computer engineering and quantum physics. The  Orion® measures skin conductance along the surface of the skin using a specific non-invasive probe. Unlike scratch testing, the Orion® allows multiple items to be tested in a short period of time, which is particularly appropriate for young patients. The information gathered is then used in conjunction with standard tests to determine which allergens or substances are underlying one’s illness. This pain-free method does not pose any risk of serious allergic reaction, which is a potential risk with traditional scratch testing. This method is also safe to use with children and   infants and is preferable for those with a fear of needles.  Food and environmental allergies / sensitivities have been shown to be an underlying component of many conditions […] the Orion® is an investigational medical device only and the performance characteristics of this product have not been established by the FDA.”

Now, in that article on EDS, MD Hall tells us:

            “It is illegal to use the devices for anything other than biofeedback.”


IV. Forth, and I don't know how to categorize these two items, but I'll append it to the already listed concerns above, are what appears to be:

a. injection of novel or ad hoc, physician-compounded, peculiar and implausible remedies – as recounted by ND Zampieron in that Arthritis book and as having happened at his practice in Connecticut -- with the patient being a minor.

We're told in that aforementioned book:
            “Success Story: Auto-Sanguis Therapy Calms the Autoimmune Reaction: Yvonne, 13, developed symptoms of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis shortly after a visit to the dentist […] in order to reverse Yvonne's arthritis, we had to eradicate her strep infection and modify her autoimmune response. This was achieved through two autoimmune therapies: auto-sanguis oral nosode therapy and injectible auto-sanguis dilution therapy.  First, we prescribed the homeopathic remedy Streptococcinum 200C at three sublingual pellets, once a day between meals, for one month.  We also prepared an oral auto-sanguis nosode through the following             method: an extraction of a small amount of Yvonne's blood was placed in a centrifuge for 20 minutes; then, one part serum was mixed with nine parts Willard's Water; the mixture was shaken vigorously 100 times. This process produces a homeopathic nosode at 1X potency. To  increase the potency of the nosode, the process was repeated six times, rendering the remedy at a potency of 6X; we added 15% ethyl alcohol to stabilize the solution. We instructed Yvonne to place ten drops of this solution under her tongue three times a day. Upon her second visit, we   increased the potency of the original nosode to 12X potency; her third visit to 30X potency; and finally to 60X potency. In addition, she was treated with an auto-sanguis injectible dilution by       extracting 3 cc (cubic centimeters) of her blood and emptying the syringe until only a microscopic film of blood remained in the cartridge. We then mixed into the same syringe 1 cc of the homeopathic nosodes Streptococcus viridans-injeel and Streptococcus haemolyticus-  injeel, and 1 cc of the homeopathic remedies Traumeel and ZEEL (indicated for inflammation and degenerative processes). The mixture was agitated 20 times rendering a solution at 1X   potency and was injected into her buttock. The process was repeated to produce a remedy of 2X  potency and injected as well. Yvonne returned for treatment once a week for one month. During  this time, injections reached a potency of 4X.Two weeks after Yvonne's last treatment, we repeated all initial blood tests and found that her body was no longer producing Streptococcus antibodies. She also no longer had positive blood factors (RF and ANA) for autoimmune reactions and she experienced com[p.218]plete relief of her arthritis symptoms. We suspected that Yvonne's recent visit to the dentist may explain how she was infected by the strep bacteria. During the routine dental cleaning, strep cell fragments in the teeth or gums translocated to      other regions of the body, prompting an immune response, leading to autoimmunity. We suggested that, in the future, Yvonne should receive preventive homeopathic treatment with Streptococcinum 200C before visiting the dentist […] Auto-sanguis (oral or injectible) dilution therapy can be administered only by a licensed physician. Practitioners can contact Eugene Zampieron at 203-263-2970.”

This sounds exceptionally implausible and invasive, so therein it carries risk without benefit.

Here is a link from one of the ingredients makers which details the procedure

(see ).

It sounds exceptionally experimental, and I'm wondering if an ND practice in Connecticut has statutory permission to compound and inject ad hoc mixtures.

Also, homeoprophylaxis, aka homeopathy preventative treatment along the lines of vaccination, is considered bogus.

And, as a reminder, the patient is 13 years old, in this account, being injected with weird substances the ND and staff have blended together.

b. pharmaceutical trails / human experimentation at his practice that I don't see authorization for:

Now, also in the book, ND Zampieron states:

            “clinical trials are under way at the Naturopathic Medical Center of Middlebury, Connecticut, to evaluate Lignum vitae and sarsaparilla extracts to treat Lyme disease, which can cause debilitation of the nervous system and severe arthritis [p.298...] Eugene R. Zampieron, ND., A.H.G., Naturopathic Medical Center, Middlebury, CT [p.370].”

I suspect that there are a whole bunch of permissions missing, which need to be granted by FDA, to actually engage in such human experimentation, in both instances.

I thank you for your time, patience, and consideration of these matters,

Rob Cullen

Author and Publisher,

The Naturocrit Blog and Podcast].

And there will be a stand-alone Naturocrit entry containing that letter of complaint as well.

Conclusion of Episode 011 aka s02e01:

So, this is the end of this Episode.

I don't think there CAN be another episode which:

features two nearby NDs I've met and spent a lot of time with, historically, because they were my instructors,

AND who simultaneously have so much media available for analysis.

I did not foresee, when I set out to do this Episode, that I'd be talking to the FDA about apparent:

apparentl HBOT misuse, unregistered human experimentation, and the injection of a minor with implausible homeopathic voodoo juices.

I won't recount the details of this episode in this conclusion, but I will state this:

all the ducks are lined up to SCHWACK naturopathy.

But lets line up a few more.

If the government, in terms of regulation and prosecution, particularly here the FDA, FTC, and DOE, isn't aware of naturopathy's SO FALSE position, it turns out that this year, the AANP, that is the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians, submitted testimony [2015 archived] IN SUPPORT of homeopathy to



WHILE the US DOE licenses their schools categorically as “science-based” and kind.

AANP wrote, in that submission:

"naturopathic physicians are taught homeopathy in naturopathic medical schools, and use it widely in practice. Homeopathy is perceived favorably by physicians and patients, both for efficacy but especially for its safety profile."

Wow: deception of patients, deception of education consumers, "WIDELY" used, and claimed to have "EFFICACY."

Now, the author is ND Rothenberg, DHANP, an NCNM ND graduate.

I'm not sure why she is not listed on the DHANP registry.

The DHANP is “Diplomate of the Homeopathic Academy of Naturopathic Physicians”.
The HANP, at, is “the Homeopathic Academy of Naturopathic Physicians”.

Their “About” page, which they've blocked with robots.txt, tells us:

“homeopathic medicines may be safely and effectively applied in chronic (long-term) conditions, as well as acute (short-term) illnesses of adults, children and animals. Homeopathic medicine are considered drugs by the FDA.”

That's the claim “effectively” upon empty sugar pills falsely categorized as "drugs".

HANP has the page up “HANP to Testify: FDA Hearing on the Regulation of Homeopathy”, which they've also blocked with robots.txt.

Somebody is HIDING.

Overall, this support for homeopathy by naturopathy is a HUGE admission:

'we contain junk we falsely label science and we are in complete science denial in our sectarian pseudomedical woofulness'.


An ADMISSION of naturopathy's GUILT, overall:

that their insides don't categorically reside within their categorical label that they engage in commerce through.

In sum.

A 'yes the Emperor is naked' moment.

And I'll state what should be stated on a used car lot, NOT about a professional, because naturopathy is MOST unprofessional:

buyer beware, buyer RUN AWAY.

But, naturopathy seems IMMUNE from prosecution.

How comfortable.

Here's my last example.

Recently, at the Naturocrit Blog, I wrote two posts:

An Oldie But Goodie: Bastyr's 'Science Subset Naturopathy Subset Homeopathy' Mother Jones Advertisement, c1989

which contained the language:

"Bastyr College of Natural Health Sciences [...including] homeopathy."

So that's a false label, that was advertised and sent through USPS way back before the Internet's dominance 26 years ago.

And there's the post “A Newie But Baddie: Bastyr's PRINTED 'Science-Based' 2015 Continuing Delusion ISBN 9870692430316”, wherein Bastyr University tells us categorically:

"science-based treatments [...] Bastyr University is named in honor of the renowned Seattle-area naturopathic physician and teacher who championed science-based natural medicine [...] deeply committed to science-based natural medicine, Dr. Bastyr [...] 'we had already decided on the basic foundation, science-based and accredited'. When Dr. Pizzorno articulated their vision for the school while recruiting faculty, students, and board members, he coined the term 'science-based natural medicine' to describe what the founders wanted to accomplish [...] the founders believed that curriculum had to be based on science"

upon such things in the book as homeopathy and reflexology.

That NEW 2015 book, just came to me through USPS.

As I am fond of saying, licensed falsehood marches on.
Post a Comment