Friday, August 11, 2017

The Naturorit Podcast - Episode 013b2 [s02e03b2] Script and Annotations

here, in this second half of Part Two of Episode 013, I discuss Jann Bellamy at Science-Based Medicine on pending Rhode Island naturopathy licensure, UB naturopathy and kind, and a letter to the USDE:

001. Episode 013b2 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 Synopsis:

In this two-part Naturocrit Podcast Episode 013, otherwise known as Season 2 Episode 3, titled "The State of Connecticut and Its Naturopathy: 'Deception, Fraud, Double-Dealing, Subterfuge, and Trickery'”, I've been looking at a very interesting and new State of Connecticut DPH document published on their '.gov' this 2017 that QUITE ACCURATELY describes

"the lack of scientific foundation of the profession of naturopathy and [...its] lack of commitment to evidence-based therapy."

I've also looked at the FALSE naturopathic label and claim of being 'squarely science' -- by way of the RIANP and ND Block in NDNR in Episode 013b1 -- which obviously completely contradicts that preponderant 'not of science' EXPERT conclusion of mainstream Connecticut allied health care.

So, as I've said, Corrupticut – I mean the State of Connecticut – looks very CONflicted academically, clinically, and commercially because by way of naturopathy in Connecticut, truly a ruse exists in terms of 'Deception, Fraud, Double-Dealing, Subterfuge, and Trickery!'

And Connecticut's hypocrisy is rampant:

after all, the very CTDPH that points out naturopathy is not science is part of the very .gov that allows naturopathy to operate in CT as 'science' academically, clinically, and commercially.

In this Episode 013b2, which is the second half of the second part of Episode 013, I'll discuss:

UB naturopathy and kind and its con of 'science subset naturopathy', and I'll provide a conclusion.

Part of my conclusion will me sharing the contents of another recent letter [by e-mail] I've sent to the USDE, which is me implementing a complaint in the system USDE terms “borrower defense to repayment.”

For what it's worth:

because, as I've said, this just ain't right.

Main Text:

SBM on Naturopathy in NE:

Incidentally, before I get to all that, since I've spoken about naturopaths in Rhode Island this Episode, recently at the blog, Jann Bellamy wrote in “Naturopathic Conquest of New England Nears Completion” (2017-07-20):

“Rhode Island is poised to become the latest state to succumb to the false notion that licensing naturopathic 'doctors' will protect the public health, safety and welfare […] with the conquest of Rhode Island, [the] naturopathic takeover of New England will be complete, with all six states comprising that area of the United States licensing naturopaths [...] RI naturopaths stand ready and waiting to foist their fake diagnoses and disproven treatments on unwitting Rhode Islanders without fear of prosecution for practicing without a license […and] it is not difficult to imagine what happens next: RI naturopaths will be back year after year pestering legislators to expand their scope of practice. They always do.”

Hear, hear.

Now, licensure doesn't hide the nakedness of the emperor who is indeed naked, as we've seen by way of Connecticut in this Episode, which has permitted naturopaths to operate with State sanction for about 90 years.

Instead, it does create quite an embarrassing contradiction for a licensing State:

contradictory obligations to the public good from its allied health care, consumer protection and public health branches, while its naturopathy members engage in an OBVIOUS con the State is an accessory to.

And in support of those “fake diagnoses and disproven treatments”, which is part of naturopathy's con, Ms. Bellamy lists what NDs in RI are currently doing diagnostically and therapeutically.

Or should we say 'pseudodiagnostically and pseudotherapeutically'.

She writes:

“RI naturopathic offerings [...include] homeopathy […] Chinese medicine [...] including tongue and pulse diagnosis [...] Bowen therapeutic technique […] hair analysis for heavy metals […] salivary hormone tests […] botanical medicine [...and] detoxification [...which is] a profitable scam invented by naturopaths.”

Because anything goes.

Like when we're told by Ms. Bellamy:

“the president of the Rhode Island Association of Naturopathic Physicians (RIANP) […] Marcy Feibelman, advises patients how to concoct their own 'warming socks' treatment, which essentially consists of wearing wet socks to bed. Indications for the treatment include, she says: 'any inflammation or infection of the throat (including a simple sore throat), neck pain, ear infections, headaches, migraines, nasal congestion, upper respiratory infections, sinus infections. Cold extremities, poor circulation. To prevent a cold. She claims warming socks: reflexively increase circulation and decrease congestion in the upper respiratory passages, head, and throat [...] this treatment is also effective for pain relief and increases the healing response during acute infections.' As SBM's own Scott Gavura pointed out, this sort of nonsense simply demonstrates the limitations of naturopathic understanding of immunity […] the RIANP president also practices 'biotherapeutic drainage,' a naturopathic treatment based on a combination of Chinese medicine, homeopathy and anthroposophy. Or, as David Gorski put it: biotherapeutic drainage [...] three woos in one!”

And it is RIANP, who represents these naturopaths and is comprised of these naturopaths, that I've pointed out labels naturopathy:

“a scientifically proven and tested system of (successful) healthcare.”

In disagreement, Ms. Bellamy writes:

“many naturopathic treatments are either unproven or disproven, including homeopathy, 'detoxification' and quirky diets, as more expansively detailed in Scott Gavura's 'Naturopathy vs. Science' series here on SBM and former naturopath Britt Hermes's blog, Naturopathic Diaries.”

Both of which I highly recommend.

I particularly enjoy it when Mr. Gavura says in his piece “Naturopathy vs. Science: Facts Edition”:

“naturopathy, despite the claims, is anything but scientific”.

And I particularly enjoy it when Ms. Hermes says in the piece "The Naturopaths are Coming! A Digest of My Talk at NECSS 2017", a talk I personally attended:

"naturopaths want to be licensed in all 50 U.S. states by 2025 with a scope of practice similar to that of medical doctors. This goal is ambitious, but it is not impossible. The very fact that naturopaths are licensed anywhere as 'doctors' or 'physicians' highlights how branding pseudoscience can lead to State-sponsored quackery."

Ms. Bellamy also points out:

"a major weakness in the [RI] bills is that they create a board of licensure for naturopathy consisting of two naturopaths, two physicians and one public member, appointed by the director of the state department of health and approved by the governor. The effectiveness of this board will hinge on appointing physicians who are not naturopathic sympathizers and who are familiar with their pseudoscience, as well as a public member who is not so enamored of naturopathy and so unschooled in science that he or she will automatically side with the naturopaths."

Good luck with that, Rhode Island.

And she points out:

“assuming the governor doesn’t exercise her veto power, RI naturopaths will be able to 'prevent and treat' any disease or condition in any patient of any age (including children, unfortunately) using [...] 'natural substances and natural therapies to support and stimulate a patient’s intrinsic self-healing processes.' In other words, in a perfect example of legislative alchemy, the RI General Assembly has incorporated the long-discredited, pre-scientific notion of vitalism into state law.”

And so licensed falsehood marches on.

And as I've said in the past, I regard even such coded vitalism within a naturopathy law to be of the KIND of issue often termed 'unconstitutional religious test or article of faith'.

Though, I must also state I have no legal expertise.

But, with both Connecticut and Rhode Island sanctioning the falsehood known as naturopathy, I don't think those States have any legal expertise either.

But onwards...

My Good Friends, Neighbors and Abusers at the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine 2017:

Now, I must say honestly that UB both enrages and disgusts me since:

it victimized me.

As I've said in the past, I naively attended its naturopathy program from 1998 until 2002 and I consider the experience fraudulent in so many ways.

I found 'naturopathy at UB' – overall, with the essentially naturopathic quite wrongly broadly posed as 'science not belief' yet without scientific merit and full of belief – to be uniquely comprised of kinds of idiocy, fraud, deception, falsehood and incompetence all quite wrongly posed as the academically, clinically and commercially virtuous.

For example:

who ever heard of University science containing what's patently science-exterior FOR DECADES and CENTURIES, and who ever heard of a program that creates requirements that they won't let you complete to graduate?



That CATEGORICAL victimizing of the unsuspecting is STILL going on academically, commercially, and clinically.

For instance specifically, and I won't belabor the points here but I will link to my online Appendices where I continue to collect this stuff:

UB is currently claiming naturopathy categorically is “health science” [2017 archived] and has done such ever since their ND school began in 1997,

while UB places the patently science-ejected [2017 archived] within that.

That is completely incompetent in so many ways, but such NONSENSICALITY is their worldview and from that their praxis.

And UB is currently broadly claiming naturopathy, as part of its University umbrella, is “non-sectarian” [2017 archived], yet within that non-sectarian marketing label are sectarian NORTH AMERICAN obligations, ideas and methods [2017 archived] aka that worldview and praxis.

Obviously, naturopathy within UB's Health Science Division is a psychopathology – as diseased ideas, behaviors and sentiments –  aka the naturopathillogical boldly disguised as “health [and] science”.

'Science subset naturopathy' is PLAINLY nonmerchantable as a product.

It is, though called “natural”, ironically a kind of illogical, harmful, in-need-of-neutralization toxic waste.

And, BECAUSE as I recently said this episode “as naturopathy members engage in an OBVIOUS con the state is an accessory to”, a critic of naturopathy is quite without aid.

Nobody occupying a position of oversight seems to care:

for me, there is no USDE, CTDE or CTDCA cavalry coming.

You gotta bring your own redemption”, to quote a Jackson Browne lyric.


enraging, disgusting.


Now, I do this podcast from a cluster of personal and professional senses of obligation NOT primarily for myself, but in order to warn others about such ruses.

Since in this Episode we are talking about naturopathy in Connecticut and New England in this present day, in relation to epistemic claims and realities, I cannot avoid talking about CT's ND-granting school UB.

But I promise not to go too deep, as it would merely be repetitive.

Let me just set up a major collision or two, shall I call it, aka CONflict by way of UB, an fraudulent apparatus that in the past I've termed “the education robbers”, as directly relates to the Report.

An Indictment and a Self-Indictment:

Obviously, the 2017 Connecticut Naturopathy Report that this Episode is about is actually an INDICTMENT.

And I must say to organized health care in Connecticut, 'it's about time aka stand to your duty, we must call naturopathy what it is, essentially'.

Here's the major collision regarding UB and that Report that basically says to naturopathy 'you are FRAUDS'.

While the report says naturopathy is GROSSLY not of science as a general knowledge and behavioral filter or foundation, within that report are such OPPOSITE UB gems as:

“[the] Vice Provost of the Health Sciences Division of the University of Bridgeport [] David Brady, ND.”

So, science subset nonscience 'does not compute', but is quite naturopathillogical.

Placing the label “science” upon homeopathy via naturopathy does NOT magically make homeopathy and naturopathy “science.”

And appointing a chiropractor and naturopath to the position of head of a Division of Health Sciences doesn't make those two credentials instantly 'of scientific rigor.'

That's quite a collision of oppositely traveling particles in this particle collider:

what you have is an accurate mainstream description, 'not science',

colliding with a certain kind of fringe epistemic deviance

aka 'we're out own kind of science, truly, that we trick you into believing is actual science in terms of our commerce'.

Therefore, the title of this episode.

So, while UB FRINGELY-crazily claims 'science subset naturopathy', because within that Health Sciences Division is UB's naturopathy program,

a much larger preponderance the mainstream rational, says 'nut-uh', not actual science.

In sum, the Report indicts UB naturopathy and North American naturopathy as PSEUDOSCIENCE.

Now, as I've mentioned, the Report's "Appendix E The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine: Evidence-Based Medicine and Naturopathy" is a paper titled "Evidence-Based Medicine and Naturopathy".

And what I haven't mentioned in full is that it states:

"naturopathy is based on holistic and vitalistic principles […] biomedicine is based on reductionism and is paradigmatically incongruent with naturopathy [...] EBM marginalizes and corrupts traditional naturopathic knowledge."

What that means, essentially, when one adjusts for the authors' distorting biases in terms of their language selection, is that naturopathy is diametrically opposed to modern science, since it is based upon what is either science-ejected or -exterior.

As I said, this is a COLLISION.

And to call such not-science science anyway, wrongly, is DEVIANCE.

This is the paper that Connecticut contemporary allied health care cites, as does the “naturopathy or naturopathic medicine is a form of pseudoscientific alternative medicine” Wikipedia entry cites.

I will repeat that CT allied health care pronouncement, because I think it is worth emphasizing:

"naturopaths trained in this state, or any [other] state, do not have sufficient education and training at this time to safely prescribe the medications they have requested. They do not have the scientific foundation, nor even the commitment to evidence-based therapy that must be the cornerstone of all practice, let alone practice that involves risk to life and limb.”

So, all in all, UB placing naturopathy within “science” is INSANE, is MADNESS.

Briefly, let's look at that Appendix E 2006 JACM paper's authors.

At the time, all were of Australia's Southern Cross University which at the time had a naturopathy program.

Only one of the six main authors is a naturopath.

More so, their backgrounds seem to be sociology.

The authors are, specifically:

Tom Jagtenberg, a PhD in Sociology from the University of Wollongong,

Sue Evans a PhD from SCU,

Airdre Grant another SCU PhD,

Ian Howden a homeopath at the time teaching at SCU, 

Monique Lewis another PhD from SCU,

and naturopath and SCU PhD Judy Singer.

Most of the PhDs were apparently acquired AFTER the publication of the paper.

At the time of its publication, only Jagtenberg was listed as a PhD in terms of credentials.

Australian naturopath Judy Singer's current CV [2017 archived] is an interesting PDF.

She tells us she has a:

“Diploma of Applied Science (Naturopathy), Southern School of Natural Therapies, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia”

and she does NOT list her co-authorship of that paper on the CV [checked].

That CV states, historically:

“guest lecture to final year Bachelor of Clinical Sciences (Naturopathy), Southern Cross University.”

I don't know, perhaps she's not happy with that 2006 paper's conclusion that naturopathy and science are diametrically opposed?

Her alma mater, Southern School of Natural Therapies is still around though SCU's naturopathy program isn't.

It may be that SCU took to heart their in-house team's paper that stated clearly that naturopathy is antithetical to science, because that program was “scrapped”.

 SCU has the PDF “2014 Course Enrollment Guide for Continuing Students School of Health & Human Sciences Bachelor of Naturopathy” [2017 archived] and where have we seen that before, 'science subset naturopathy'?

The University of Bridgeport.

And that false claim is also at SSNT [2017 archived] where they offer a “Bachelor of Health Science (Naturopathy) [...which includes] nutrition, herbal medicine, homeopathy, flower essences and naturopathic diagnostic techniques such as iridology.”


science subset naturopathy subset pseudotherapeutics and pseudodiagnostics.

And there's something else similar to UB there:

we're told by SSNT [2017 archived] that it's “government accredited.”

How BAD.

Now, let me now talk about a self-indictment.

Let me talk about the World Naturopathic Federation's July 2017 publications regarding naturopathy's essential-defining vitalism.

First there's a July 25, 2017 press release by way of Facebook that stated:

"WNF Media Release: Defining the Global Naturopathic Profession […] the philosophies of vitalism and holism are core to naturopathic practice globally […] the World Naturopathic Federation (WNF) is pleased to release a concise statement defining the global naturopathic profession […] naturopathic doctor Iva Lloyd [no stranger to this podcast], president of the WNF, indicated the document, Defining the Global Naturopathic Profession, received full approval during the WNF 2017 General Assembly (GA) held in Phoenix, Arizona USA on July 11th and 12th [...which included] representatives from fourteen countries spanning six world regions."

Now, North American naturopathy is quite central to this WNF.

After all, Iva Lloyd is a CCNM CAND ND based in Canada.

Also, WNF tells us:

the AANP and CAND, the North American naturopath organizations, are of the status "full member",

the North American schools CCNM and Bastyr University are "educational members",

and the schools' consortia AANMC is a "nonprofit sponsor".

So, let's look at that statement the press release mentions.

"the foundational basis of the naturopathic profession includes two philosophies, seven principles and key theories […] the philosophies of 'vitalism' and 'holism' are core to naturopathic practice globally [...] vitalism describes the intelligence that animates each and every person and it refers to forces beyond the physical self that govern life, health and healing [...] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [...] a detailed review of these concepts can be found in the White Papers on Naturopathic Philosophy, Principles and Theories on the WNF website."

So let's go to that.

That "WNF White Paper: Naturopathic Philosophies, Principles and Theories" [2017 archived] has the root "vital" in the document at least 132 times and "medicatrix" at least 37 times.


Some of the science-exterior vitalism in the PDF includes:

"naturopathic philosophies: the philosophies of 'vitalism' and 'holism' are core to naturopathic practice globally [...] the body has an innate ability to heal, referred to as vitalism […] vitalism, or vital force describes the intelligence that animates each and every person and it refers to forces beyond the physical self that govern life, health and healing [...] the vital force is an invisible power which is discernible only from its effects [...] the concept vital force [...] vitalism is called by many different names, including life force, breath, chi, qi, ki, prana, and mana, depending upon the particular culture or tradition [...] vitalism is also associated with concepts of personal essence, spirit or soul [...] the naturopathic concept of vitalism [...] the vitalistic approach [...] the vital force of the person [...] vitalism [...] modern vitalism [...] an organism's vitality is complexity.”

Therein, self-indicted.

Now, even though Bastyr is a principal to all this 'vitalism-supernaturalism science-exterior science-ejected and kind', Bastyr has the 2013 web page up “Naturopathic Doctors Adopt Evidence-Based Medicine, Study Finds” [2017 archived].

It is ALSO in the REPORT, as Appendix F.

I DON'T think a self-written web page is much of a supporting document.

It's actually rather pathetic.

Bastyr states on that web page Appendix F:

“while naturopaths have conducted and used clinical research for years, they stress that there are things conventional science cannot measure, such as the body's natural ability to heal [that's coded vitalism…] during his Bastyr studies, he discovered that the scientific dimension of medicine and the vis, or vitalistic dimension, are not exclusive.”


How is what science cannot measure and what is within science, 'not exclusive'?

They are different KINDS of knowledge.

This is where I say two things:

[i.] naturopathy is plainly STUPID.

You cannot obligate yourself to 'an immeasurable invisible nonparsimonious inhabiting spirit responsible for healing belief' that IS exterior to science and then say 'we're all about EVIDENCE and what's WITHIN science.'

Those ARE exclusive, to not know that is STUPID.

[ii.] And you can see how, in invoking the vitalistic place-holder to actual knoweldge, why vitalism is classically referred to as a science-stopper:

vitalism was always a placeholder that said 'can't be figured out, lets not inquire' as opposed to 'let's try and figure it out, let's inquire.'

So vitalism was a science-stopper and is a science-stopper even today.

And that's stupid because healing is a biological event, and is not locked up within a black box that cannot be inquired into.

Obviously, when Bastyr says "body's ability to heal", they're not talking about that biological, inquireable physical body.

I've called such supernaturalization superstition-ization of healing aka vitalism "cultic mystical weirdness" in the past.

Yet Bastyr continues to use the categorical label “firmly science-based” [2017 archived]

and simultaneously their page "About" states this epistemic and ontologic muddle:

"science-based natural medicine that integrates mind, body, spirit, and nature"

which is the claim of science subset the supernatural and vitalistic minimally,

which is an epistemic muddle falsely claimed to be logically distinct.

It's all just so duh.

So much DUH.

And just for specific reference, epitomizing this difference between fake science and actual science, UB has up the UB Division of Health Sciences page “Course Offerings for Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.) Degree Program” [2017 archived] which includes the four courses in homeopathy required within their ND degree YET also contains this promise:

“the College of Naturopathic Medicine curriculum follows a sequential course of study in which students continuously build upon a deepening foundation of biomedical and clinical sciences. Concurrently, students are integrating naturopathic philosophy, principles, and therapeutics into their medical knowledge.”

So, again that claim that 'we are an epistemic distinction, science' and then an admission of blending or integrating that with nonscience and then calling the whole thing health science.

I'll state the obvious, concerning that web page:

a “science” foundation excludes homeopathy because homeopathy is bullshit as a therapeutic, scientifically speaking.

So, the heart of naturopathy is the integrating or blending of bullshit with science and then falsely calling it all categorically science.

Last, in terms of UB and CT naturopathy, let me talk about the Appendix which was their contribution to the Report.

That is “Appendix G - University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine vs. MD Medical School Curriculum”.

The introduction describes this Appendix as:

“a document, created by the Connecticut Naturopathic Physicians Association and the University of Bridgeport, College of Naturopathic Medicine.”

So, CT naturopathy and both their logos are in the Appendix.

We're told:

“the University Of Bridgeport College Of Naturopathic Medicine is one of six naturopathic programs accredited by the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Colleges (AANMC) [a WNF member] in the United States. Graduation from a school accredited by the AANMC is one of the requirements for licensure in Connecticut […] there are two such colleges in Canada (Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine, Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine) [another WNF member] and five in the United States (Bastyr University [another WNF member], National College of Natural Medicine, National University of Health Sciences, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences [and the] University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine).”

And explicitly just there, by way of NUHS, we have a categorical 'science subset naturopathy' claim which is categorically FALSE.

Now in terms of SCIENCE, in this Appendix, they state:

“total Instructional hours at UBCNM are 4515 hours, comprising 765 hours of basic sciences [...and] 2358 hours of clinical sciences and 1392 hours of clinical practice.”

I read that as a UB claim that their ND students learn two science categories and then APPLY that in clinical practice.

But that's BULLSHIT, categorically, obviously.

So, again:

because clinical sciences in the land of naturopathy include homeopathy and clinical practice in the land of UB requires application of homeopathy, just for starters, and that homeopathy need I reminded is on the North American licensure exam and it is miscategorized as a clinical science there.

The Report states that the UB contingent of the “Committee on the Practice of Naturopathy” included:

“Marcia Prenguber, ND, Dean; Jose Mahfoud, MD, ND, Professor; [and] David Brady, ND, Vice Provost.”

Regarding Prenguber, I'd podcasted in “s02e02c1.2 [...] Script and Annotations” about Prenguber's testimony to the Connecticut General Assembly.

I'd written:

“UB's naturopathic college Dean, ND Prenguber, was the one who spoke before the Connecticut General Assembly, aka lawmakers, in 2014 […as transcribed in] in 'PH Committee Hearing Transcript for 03/14/2014' [2015 archived...and she'd said] my name is Marsha Prenguber [...] I'm a naturopathic physician, and I've recently returned to the state of Connecticut to live and work here as a newly appointed dean of the College of Naturopathic Medicine at the University of Bridgeport [...] I received my naturopathic medicine degree from the College of Naturopathic Medicine in Oregon [now National University of Natural Medicine, formerly NCNM]. I also completed a residency in naturopathic oncology [two of the scariest words I've ever heart put together]. I'm the past president of the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education [...] the US Department of Education-recognized programmatic accrediting body for naturopathic schools. That experience provided me with the skills to evaluate the academic and clinical aspects of the naturopathic schools, and evaluate each program against the rigorous standards of the accrediting body.”

So, why is homeopathy for instance being falsely placed within the category SCIENCE at UB


if we have supposed “rigorous standards”?

This is a FALSE assurance.

Also I'd podcasted in “Episode 009 Part 2b - Script and Annotations”:

“the UB page 'Marcia Prenguber New Dean of UB College of Naturopathic Medicine' [2015 archived] states 'Dr. Prenguber holds a doctorate in natural medicine [...] a Master of Science in Education Administration [...] and a Master of Science in Education [...and we're told] 'the University and the College of Naturopathic Medicine could not be more pleased to have such an experienced physician and leader within the naturopathic medicine community join us,' said UB Vice Provost of Health Sciences Dr. David Brady. 'The University is committed to attracting the brightest and most innovative leaders in all programs within the UB Division of Health Sciences, and the addition of Dr. Prenguber is the latest demonstration of that commitment.''

Oh my, science categorically stated again subset naturopathy.

And I can't imagine pseudoscience is acceptable if your background is a master of science in education administration and a master of science in education but that just might be me, connecting the dots.

“Senator Gerratana [speaking]: '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 [speaking]: 'of course [...] our program is an evidence-based curriculum' [...and I wrote] an evidence-based curriculum and there you go, a CATEGORICAL falsehood that's SO EASY to show. Senator Gerratana [speaking]: 'it's a scientific evidence-based curriculum?' [...ND Brady speaking]: 'Yes, absolutely'.”

So, they'd falsely presented naturopathy, 'categorically in sum', as rigorously science based.

Both NDs Brady and Mahfoud are UB ND graduates:

respectively, 2004 [2017 archived] and 2010. 

I actually sat in classes with Brady while he was going through the program when I was at UB.

And Prenguber is an NUNM graduate, and of course, you can easily go to NUNM and find a science label placed upon that which isn't within science [2017 archived].

ND Mahfoud's UB bio. page [2017 archived], along the lines of science again, claims:

“during his clinic shift, Dr. Mahfoud teaches students the importance of science-oriented thought and objectivity […] he stresses evidence-based practices, emphasizes the importance of scientific literature, and encourages students to enhance their knowledge about mainstream medicine […] although the faculty has a wide range of experiences, the emphasis on naturopathic principles is never lacking. In fact, the students in Dr. Mahfoud’s classes can expect to be asked to name the six principles of naturopathic medicine on their quizzes. Dr. Mahfoud believes that these principles are stressed in UBCNM’s program, which allow the students to remain rooted to the philosophy of naturopathic medicine.”

So that was:

science-oriented thought and objectivity, evidence-based practices, scientific literature, knowledge enhancement, and naturopathic principles ROOTED.

The contents of those principles Dr. Mahfoud mentions, in great part, are actually science-ejected like:


or not science supported,

or external to science as supernaturalism, as belief.

In other words:

'does not compute, does not compute'

for a school claiming to be nonsectarian health science.


-- and you'll have to forgive some of my language bending here --

one of the most 'deceptive, fraudulent, double-delt, subterfuged, trickeryest' of naturopathic misrepresentations I've ever read is what CT naturopathy did when asked in this Report how 'greater prescription privileges' relates to their central vitalistic belief.

Talk about misrepresentation and obfuscation!

The Report tells us:

"before proceeding further into the discussion of curriculum, a committee member representing the University of Bridgeport responded to the question of how prescribing prescription medications aligns with the philosophy and principles of naturopathy in the context of the six principles of naturopathy [...for] the healing power of nature [...and mind you at the heart of naturopathy, NUNM, we find stated that this central vitalistic belief is 'life force spirit running the body', the UB representative stated] 'while naturopaths deal with natural substances, sometimes a prescription is more in line with what a patient needs'."

Well, that response has NOTHING to do with what that HPN principle essentially is, contextually, BECAUSE you can find archived UB web pages directly equating HPN with "life force".

What a MESS.

And they never seem to have any problem with this kind of misrepresentation and obfuscation.

That 2006 JACM paper, comparatively, WAS transparent in stating:

"a naturopathic educator's response to EBM [...] vitalism lies at the heart of natural medicine, a deep respect for the body's self-healing capacity and a commitment to working with that innate force. Vital force!"

And there was an exclamation point after vital force in that paper.

What a CONnectict DODGE.

And that's a enough of UB, as I am more than ever:

enraged and disgusted.

A Conclusion:

I had defined:

deception, fraud, double-dealing, subterfuge, trickery, sectarian and 'sectarian medicines', pseudoscience, academic, clinical, commercial, and to con or grift.

I'd like to add another one:

'epistemic fascism'.

With naturopathy's political, commercial, academic and clinical day-to-day sectarian pseudomedical con, I blatantly see of course therein:

deception, fraud, double-dealing, subterfuge, and trickery,

plus heaps of delusion too,

particularly as regards 'naturopathy's self-granted yet incompetent science-expertise ability'.

They reflexively claim science without basically science, without scientific deliberation or -method or even -KNOWLEDGE.

They claim science by fiat, because they cannot earn that status by the democratic and transparent process that true science is.

"a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control [ ... ] and forcible suppression of opposition."

I regard naturopathy as a variety of 'epistemic fascism'.

A Last Letter For This Conclusion:

Now, let me share the recent letter I'd written to the USDE which is me implementing a complaint in the system USDE terms borrower defense to repayment. has the web page "Borrower Defense to Repayment" which states:

"to apply for federal student loan forgiveness based on borrower defense, please submit an application [...either by] an online application form [that can be e-mailed... or by] a fillable PDF application form [...that can be sent] by regular mail to U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 429060, San Francisco, CA 94142."

First, there's the form, which goes like this, briefly:

"borrower [...] Robert Cullen [...] School [...] University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] Program [ ... ] Naturopathic Medicine [ ... ] Credential [...] doctorate [...for the section] Educational Services [...which asks] did the school mislead you (or fail to tell you important information) [hell yeah!] about educational services, such as the availability of externships, qualifications of teachers, instructional methods, or other types of educational services? [...and I answer] horrible advising. See attached [...and for the section] Other [ asks] do you have any other reasons relating to your school that you believe qualify you for borrower defense, such as your school failing to perform its obligations under its contract with you, or that there is a judgment against your school in a Federal court, a State court, or in front of an administrative board or that you believe that you have a state law cause of action against the school? Is there some other reason you feel your school misled you? [...hell yeah!] if yes to any of the above, you must provide detailed information about how the school misled you. Please also describe any financial harm to you as a result of the school's conduct  [...and I answer] Categorical epistemic / academic falsehood. See attached [...and it follows up] did you choose to enroll in your school based in part on the issues describe above? [...and I answer] Yes."

In that attachment, I wrote:

"Background, a Synopsis, and My Complaint Structure: Though it has been 15 years and counting since I left this fraudulent graduate school that I attended for four years, the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] because I carry the loans for life [...] and the effects of the diversion that this false inducement caused for life, I feel that my situation and argument is persistent.  Also, in terms of persistence, what I'll point out below is a perpetual ruse that current education customers and future naturopathic education consumers experience or will experience by way of UB. To be blunt, the degree 'Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine' as offered by the University of Bridgeport Division of Health Sciences through their College of Naturopathic Medicine - all fully accredited and CTDHE and USDE endorsed - is a false categorization of naturopathy as 'science' when what is essentially 'naturopathic' either has been rejected / ejected by / from science or is a supernatural belief system that national science standards adamantly do not permit within academic science.  As a quite impressive preponderance, let me cite from the recent document from the CTDPH titled 'Report to the General Assembly: A Report Based on the Committee on the Practice of Naturopathy Convened Pursuant to Special Act 16-3 Raul Pino, MD, MPH, Commissioner February 17, 2017' which states broadly:

'naturopaths trained in this state, or any state, do not have sufficient education and training [...] they do not have the scientific foundation, nor even the commitment to evidence-based therapy that must be the cornerstone of all practice, let alone practice that involves risk to life and limb.'

This is signed by the: Connecticut State Medical Society, Connecticut Nurses Association,
Connecticut Academy of Family Physicians, CTAPRNS, Connecticut Association of Nurse Anesthetists, Connecticut Dermatologic Society, Connecticut Society of Eye Physicians, Connecticut Coalition of Advanced Practice Nurses, Connecticut Urology Society, [and the] Connecticut ENT Society.

I have recently published a podcast episode detailing this document titled 'The State of Connecticut an Its Naturopathy: 'Deception, Fraud, Double-Dealing, Subterfuge, and Trickery'.

This is the CT Department of Public Health and all of CT allied healthcare blanketly pointing out the crux of my complaint against the University of Bridgeport doctorate Naturopathic Medicine that UB has falsely positioned within 'science' categorically:

naturopathy, specifically ALL naturopathy degrees broadly, are not of the 'scientific' in essence.

In that sense, the product 'Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine' is unmerchantable.

This is something I realized during my time at UB and that is why I stopped my doctorate in

Now, I hate to be curt but this CT allied healthcare pronouncement brings to mind a legal doctrine [and you'll have to forgive my pronunciation]:

res ipsa loquitur.

This 'science' Doctorate of Naturopathic Medicine offered by the University of Bridgeport's Division of Health Sciences through their College of Naturopathic Medicine is illegitimate.

It violates, as an example in commerce, so many consumer protections, and it violates, as an example in academics, scientific integrity and academic integrity.

It also violates one's freedom of belief.

And here is some copious EVIDENCE.

Following the points in the fill-able PDF form 'United States Department of Education Application for Borrower Defense to Loan Repayment' that this appendage is attached to, I'll detail how my 'school misled you or engaged in other misconduct' in both the category OTHER and EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.

For the Section 'OTHER':

This section asks:

'do you have any other reasons relating to your school that you believe qualify you for borrower defense, such as your school: failing to perform its obligations under its contract with you; or that there is a judgment against your school in a Federal court, a State court, or in front of an administrative board or that you believe that you have a state law cause of action against the school? My answer is an unequivocal: YES. Is there some other reason you feel your school misled you? My answer is an unequivocal: YES.

'Provide detailed information about how the school misled you [ ... ] also describe any financial harm to you as a result of the school's conduct':

a) how the school misled me:

Through the lens of the document I earlier mentioned, which objectively delineates naturopathy as 'not science', I was misled by UB because it then and it now falsely labels naturopathy 'health science.'

I'd said 'copious' evidence, so I also recommend this public database I've been adding to on a regular basis, examples of UB naturopathy claiming science [here], while committed to a science-ejected central concept, known in archaic defunct biology as 'vitalism' [here].  So, in sum, as my 13-episode podcast series quite copiously details, naturopathy is fake science aka pseudoscience.

Again I'll mention the UB self-labeling 'science' upon naturopathy and the Connecticut allied healthcare profession objectively contradicting that label in explicitly stating 'they do not have the scientific foundation, nor even the commitment to evidence-based therapy.'

b) financial harm:

A diversion from legitimate medicine and science graduate studies, piles of student loan debt that blocked further studies due to aggregate loan caps.


This section asks: 'did the school mislead you (or fail to tell you important information) about educational services, such as the availability of externships, qualifications of teachers, instructional methods, or other types of educational services?' My answer is an unequivocal: YES.

'Provide detailed information about how the school misled you [ ... ] also describe any financial harm to you as a result of the school's conduct':

a) how the school misled me:

The epistemic location of naturopathy, as pseudoscience, and the belief location of naturopathy, as sectarian belief system aka sectarian medicine, were never clearly explained to me from the beginning.

I never had an assigned adviser, and I never met ever once never ever in the course of
four years with an adviser for this doctorate.

What kind of four-year program doesn't advise?

And the permissions I got from Associate Dean Anthony Ross to alter my schedule -- I had to advise myself -- were very very bad supervision.

The overseeing Dean, Peter Martin, was the head of the Naturopathy College.

Regarding belief, the school claims 'non-sectarian' and then within the course of four years I found myself having to obligate myself to a specific belief set / creed - which is the heart of naturopathy - in order to graduate and in order to be licensed.

Calling such 'science' is a RUSE.

In lauding its guarantee of mainstream academic educational standards, UB quite didn't do what it promised and implied in those guarantees.

What I should have been told before I began, in terms of advising and clarity, is that UB's Doctorate in Naturopathic Medicine is:

'an unethical sectarian pseudoscience' and that the goal of such a program is to inculcate students into that grift.

b) financial harm:

A diversion from legitimate medicine and science graduate studies, piles of student loan debt that blocked further studies.

Suggested reading:

So, as for stuff I publish online, you can visit the Naturocrit Blog, where for eleven years I've been accumulating support for the argument I've entailed in this appeal [ ... ] and for a more collective, preponderant source, there's the article on naturopathy at Wikipedia which has culled from the scholarship on naturopathy, in sum, this pronouncement:

'naturopathy or naturopathic medicine is a form of pseudoscientific, alternative medicine [...] the ideology and methods of naturopathy are based on vitalism and folk medicine, rather than evidence based medicine. Naturopathic practitioners generally recommend against modern medical practices, including but not limited to medical testing, drugs, vaccinations, and surgery. Instead, naturopathic study and practice rely on unscientific notions, often leading naturopathic doctors to diagnoses and treatments that have no factual merit. Naturopathic medicine is considered by the medical profession to be ineffective and possibly harmful, raising ethical issues about its practice. In addition to accusations
from the medical community, such as the American Cancer Society, naturopaths and naturopathic doctors have repeatedly been accused of being charlatans and practicing quackery'".

Ethical Obligations and This Conclusion:

The very last thing I want to do, since I regularly teach so much allied health care Law and Ethics and I have a national credential with a rigorous ethical code from which I teach allied health care, is touch on the ethical obligations of modern allied health care from both the medical and nursing sides.

First, there's medicine's obligations to scientific knowledge and society.

You can find this for instance in the international Physician's Charter, which states:

"much of medicine’s contract with society is based on the integrity and appropriate use of scientific knowledge and technology. 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 [...] physicians must be committed to lifelong learning and be responsible for maintaining the medical knowledge and clinical and team skills necessary for the provision of quality care. More broadly, the profession as a whole must strive to see that all of its members are competent and must ensure that appropriate mechanisms are available to accomplish this goal."

So, science and self-policing.

Also, the AMA Code of Ethics states:

"a physician shall uphold the standards of professionalism, be honest in all professional interactions, and strive to report physicians deficient in character or competence, or engaging in fraud or deception, to appropriate entities [...] a physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, maintain a commitment to medical education, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation, and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated."

Again, science and self-policing.

Since I'm a nationally registered medical professional, I have obligations to these codes.

My own particular code, which also applied to my instructor credential, states:

"AMT professionals shall strive to increase their technical knowledge, shall continue to learn, and shall continue to apply and share scientific advances in their fields of professional specialization [...] AMT professionals recognize that they are responsible for any personal wrongdoing, and that they have an obligation to report to the proper authorities any knowledge of professional abuse or unlawful behavior by any party involved in the patient’s diagnosis, care and treatment."

So again, science and self-policing.

Then, as per national nursing standards, there's the "Nurses Code of Ethics" which states:

"advancing the profession by developing, implementing, and maintaining professional standards in clinical, administrative, and educational practice. Standards are guidelines which reflect the grounding of nursing in ethical principles and a defined body of scientific knowledge [...] nursing knowledge come from both the realms of the sciences and the humanities [...] nurses have a duty to question, report, and refuse to participate in research that they deem morally objectionable [...] nurses are also expected to report errors committed or observed during the course of their practice to appropriate supervisory personnel [...] there should be standards and policies in place for reporting impaired or incompetent practice [...] being an advocate means that the nurse takes action against any incompetent, illegal, unethical, or impaired practice by any member of the health care team or healthcare system that jeopardizes the health, well being or rights of the patient."

So, again, science and self-policing.

Now, the AANP, the national US ND organization, writes in "Professional Education":

"a licensed naturopathic physician (ND) attends a four-year, graduate-level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an MD, but also studies holistic and nontoxic approaches to therapy with a strong emphasis on disease prevention and optimizing wellness. In addition to a standard medical curriculum, the naturopathic physician also studies clinical nutrition, homeopathic medicine, botanical medicine, psychology, and counseling. A naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams [that's the NPLEX which falsely labels homeopathy a clinical science] so that he or she may be licensed by a state or jurisdiction as a primary care general practice physician. Please see the AANMC’s Professional Competency Profile for more information."

So, a claim that naturopathy is AT LEAST medical as in "same [and] standard", and then rigor subset junk.

And in that Profile, we find an over-arching obligation to the science-ejected since we're told:

"professional competencies: the naturopathic doctor will [...] evaluate and integrate biomedical, clinical arts and science knowledge in the context of naturopathic principles and philosophy in clinical practice."

So, a sectarian skewing lens, subset science, is naturopathy's worldview.

And that is NOT "firmly science-based" or "same."

There is NO expressed obligation to science or self-policing.

In fact, what these naturopathic standards do is permit DEVIANCE and the naturopathillogical.

It is:

institutionalized cultic mystical weirdness.

Thank you for boldly listening to this now completed Episode 013.
Post a Comment