Abject Manipulative Opacity: The Journal-Published Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians' Principles of Care

here, such an egregious violation of informed consent and scientific transparency:

001. so there's 2019's "Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians: Principles of Care Guidelines" in Current Oncology, which is written by NDs Marsden, Nigh, Wright, Birdsall, Wright and Traub, and:

amazingly, the article does not in any manner mention naturopathy's essential therapeutic goal, of treating the vital force.  Searches for "vital", "force", "power", "medicatrix" do not have any hits.So, what you have here is a subset of naturopathic care that does not reveal the larger general naturopathic principle of care.

ironically, there's a section titled "informed consent" and that states "it is important that the ND ONC provide a clear explanation of the logical relationships between alternative care options and health outcomes, and a summary (where possible and appropriate) of both the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations."

[Marsden, E., Nigh, G., Birdsall, S., Wright, H., & Traub, M. (2019). Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians: Principles of Care Guidelines. Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 26(1), 12-18.]

002. them overarching principles that dare not speak their name above, by way of the central alma mater of the ND authors:

002.a. so, ND Marsden is a CCNM ND graduate; ND Nigh is an NUNM ND graduate; ND Birdsall is an NUNM ND graduate; ND Wright is a Bastyr ND graduate; and ND Traub is an NUNM ND graduate;

002.b. and at NUNM you get:

the transparent explanation of naturopathy's overall principle of care, to treat a science-ejected, imaginary, sectarian figmentation called a "vital force."  There falsely claimed as able to survive scientific scrutiny, by the way.  Tucked away from scrutiny in terms of a journal audience?  By hook or by crook...

003. as you can see:

naturopaths are polluting medical journals with manipulative opacity which is quite in opposition to the idea of transparency in science and informed consent in healthcare ethics.  Oh what a tangled web we weave...  Principle number one, deceive passively. 

004. yet in the same Journal edition, we're told by NDs Seely and Verma: 

"what is common to all providers is the goal of delivering the best care for patients in a manner that is multidisciplinary, honours patient choice, is scientifically sound, supports the whole person, and achieves the best quality of life for patients";

I don't think so.