Monday, February 20, 2017

NUHS (fake science) Says We Need More Naturopaths (fake scientists)

here, it always amazes me how they get away with it:

001. NUHS has the ND Biscoe authored '.edu subset science subset naturopathy' page "Why We Need More Naturopathic Doctors in America in 2017" (2017-02-01) [2017 archived] which argues:

"naturopathic medicine doctors (NDs) [...] with demand for this type of holistic care growing, there is certainly a need for more trained NDs [...] more and more states are beginning to recognize the value of naturopathic medicine to their citizens [...] more people than ever are seeking forms of natural health care treatments and are choosing naturopathic doctors as their main source of primary care [...]";

ah, a claim that there is growth.  But, one interesting metric is Google's Trends which, when I search the term "naturopathic", gives me this contrary context -- what I see as diminishment:
And of course, with naturopathy turning science on its head and falsely categorizing nonscience as science, what kind of "value" is such a reversal of values?

"naturopathic physicians or NDs can offer a new perspective [...] using traditional healing methods, principles, and practices, naturopathic medicine focuses on holistic, proactive prevention and comprehensive diagnosis and treatment. NDs combine the wisdom of cooperating with nature with the rigors of modern science, utilizing gentle treatments that support the body’s own healing power [...] naturopathic medicine focuses on treating a wide-spectrum of illnesses using nature’s healing power.  This healing power [...]";

so, what is that "new perspective"?  Well, it's actually IRRATIONALITY.  You've got NUHS saying explicitly as a category "science", it its bloody name FFS.  Yet we're told "traditional" stuff, which we know must contain what is unable to survive scientific vetting.  And of course we have that vague terms "nature" and "holistic".  And then we have science 'combined': science is an epistemic distinction, and naturopathy is labeled as within science, yet naturopathy defines itself as an epistemic conflation.  That's completely IRRATIONAL.  And of course, they refuse to be transparent about naturopathy-essential science-exterior stuff: "the wisdom of cooperating with nature [...] the body's own healing power [...] nature's healing power [...] healing power".  Those are codes for science-ejected vitalism at the heart of naturopathy.  Here is such written into web pages and there too falsely claimed as science.

"treatment modalities can include nutritional counseling, botanical medicine, homeopathy, hydrotherapy, and minor surgery [...]";

there's the hugely science-ejected, within what is claimed as categorically science.  So, to put it simply: NUHS is fake science training fake scientists.

"patients who see a naturopathic doctor can often both avoid costly drugs and also the often harmful side-effects that may result from using them [...]"; 

now, while naturopathy cannot be definition operationally be ethical, here it is subtly accusing mainstream medicine of being basically garbage.  Now, drugs go through a process of testing for safety and efficacy.  The supplements and herbs that naturopaths pose a parallel in terms of efficacy DO NOT.  So, obviously we have a false equivalency being set up, for what is truly INFERIOR: naturopathy.

"identifying and treating the causes of an illness rather than just the symptoms is one of the six principles of naturopathic medicine [...]";

now, what amazes me is the LACK of transparency about ANOTHER naturopathic principle, that coded vitalism.  Yet, if you go to that page I've linked to above, we're told: "it is these principles that distinguish the profession from other medical approaches: [#1] the healing power of nature, vis 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."  And of course the Next Generation Science Standards tell us that such "life force" is an epitome of what is science-ejected.  [That's an elementary school's STEM stuff!].

"those who visit an ND, who has a degree from a CNME accredited program, can rest assured that he/she is trained in these principles. Another principle NDs follow is to be a teacher, not just a doctor to patients. NDs strive to educate patients [...]";

now, you'd have to know something that is correct in order to be, though, a 'good' teacher.  CNME basically designs ND schools to be pseudoscience factories, because they use the categorical label science like NUHS which is a CNME member, upon such things as vitalism which is part of those mandatory principles.  So, the dissemination of fake science is the hub of naturopathy.

"licensure ensures that an ND holds a graduate degree from an accredited naturopathic medical school — such as National University of Health Sciences — successfully passed national board exams, and complies with practice and professional standards set forth by state legislators [...]";

so, a FALSE assurance because what's really happening is science subset naturopathy subset the science-ejected.  Those national board exams falsely label homeopathy as "core clinical science."

"all of this means patients can trust they are receiving quality care [...]";

bullshit.  At least on a used care lot you have a Lemon Law.

Post a Comment