001. from the YouTube account "Naturopathic Specialists, LLC", there's "Google Autocomplete – Day 2 of Naturopathic Medicine Week 2019"(2019)[saved 2019-10-16] which states:
.
[tags: #counterquackeryclaim #reversalofvalues #miseducation #vitalism #pseudomedical #homeopathy]
.
"[from the description] in this series from Naturopathic Medicine Week 2019, our doctors [...] answer the top questions about naturopathic medicine as found on Google autosuggest [...including] what is naturopathic medicine? What is the difference between a licensed ND and a naturopath? Is naturopathic medicine evidence-based? Is naturopathic medicine effective? Is naturopathic medicine quackery? [...]";
some good questions!
"[from the video, question] 'what is naturopathic medicine' [...Rubin] 'a system of medicine wherein a practitioner provides treatments to the patient whether they be spiritual, mind/body [...] nutritional, botanical, homeopathic, intravenous all along and in line with the precepts of naturopathic medicine' [...Darling] 'the best that medicine has to offer' [...]";
really, that's what they say. That's all you get. So let me be clear: homeopathy IS quackery. And homeopathy is essential to naturopathy. You'll see an absurd answer regarding quackery from Rubin below. Now, them unmentioned "precepts": Rubin's own alma mater, SCNM according to his bio., in the SCNM 2018-2019 student clinical handbook [a CNME accredited school], states that central to those precepts is the science-ejected concept of vitalism as "life force" [never mind the science-exterior supernaturalism also within naturopathy, which is an article of faith] and yet that categorically naturopathy is science at its foundation. Does not compute! Where is intellectual and academic integrity here? Instead, you get the naturopathillogical. This is NOT best. This is not medicine, which is an applied science with intellectual and academic integrity.
"[question] 'what is the difference between a licensed ND and a naturopath' [...Darling] 'got me on that one' [...Rubin] 'anyone who is licensable would have to graduate from a CNME accredited school and then have passed board exams' [...]";
so, I take it NOW that naturopaths are to no longer talk about 'them other nonCNME naturopaths'! Now, if the schools are nonsensical and the peak of that edifice is the licensure exam, is it no surprise that the exam falsely categorizes homeopathy as a science? Again: quackery. Licensed falsehood.
"[question] 'is naturopathic medicine quackery' [...Rubin] 'no it's not quackery. I think it's quackery for anyone who would pose that question. And I think anyone who would put that out on the internet and insinuate that I just think that a lot of times there's a lot of dogma in that. Maybe fear. And that they've never spent time in a good licensed naturopathic doctor's office or sat with them' [...Darling] 'I agree and that's why I think it's important that we all take the time to educate one another on what we do offer' [...Rubin] 'we're licensed naturopathic physicians. We went to school, we got a degree, we passed our boards, and we're regulated by our state board' [...]";
ah, the big question. So here's Rubin's logic: it is crap to question whether or not something is crap / it is crappy to analyze. Makes sense, based on what naturopathy is all about: dissolve ethical differences, stop inquiry. Now, asking for evidence and integrity is not dogmatic. Or quackery. Being unable to be swayed by evidence and sound arguments is dogmatic. And of course, a condescending claim that such a position of evidence and integrity is somehow a negative -- fear, ignorance -- is quite a mindfuck. I'm all for educating, but not miseducating. And naturopathy's reversal of values is quite a miseducation. And is seems with naturopathy that all the institutionalized trappings, as mentioned -- school, degree, boards, regulation -- merely perpetuates and protects nonsense. When you actually Google "is naturopathy quackery?", you get quite a different opinion from what's posed in this video.
No comments:
Post a Comment