Kelly Warner at WVAL: Naturopathic Oncology One-Sided Boosterism

here, one-sided supposed reporting, without an ounce of argument concerning the essentially naturopathic:

001. at kval.com, Kelli Warner writes and presents in "Targeting Cancer: Treating the Whole Patient Through Integrative Oncology Care" (2019-11-06):

"Samantha [...] turned to Dr. Stacy Dunn at Pacific Integrative Oncology in Eugene and found relief through acupuncture [...] fellows of the American Board of Naturopathic Oncology, Dr. Dunn and her colleague Dr. Michelle Niesley [..] as are naturopathic doctors who specialize in oncology. They provide patients evidence-based naturopathic therapies to improve quality of life during and after cancer treatment, helping to ease side effects, including nausea, fatigue, insomnia, neuropathy and even depression and anxiety [...and there is an 'integrative oncology care' video embedded in the page wherein NDs are claimed to treat] 'body, mind and spirit' [...] and we see ND Dunn doing acupuncture and we're told] 'they provide evidence based therapies [...] evidence-based information' [...and we're told they're] 'taking the best'";

now, a point [pun!]: naturopathy, essentially, doesn't care a whit for evidence or science, besides using those categorical labels to further their marketing.  E.g.: at the AANP, which is the mother organization of the ABNO, we have such nonsense as the page "Zicam is Not Homeopathy" wherein the quite not true statement is made: "homeopathy is a 200 year-old medicinal science." Therein, pseudoscience. And acupuncture is quite a myth / pseudoscience as well, and that is up at the general encyclopedia, which tells is preponderantly "an overview of Cochrane reviews found that acupuncture is not effective for a wide range of conditions." Therein, so much for science and evidence. And, of course, one has to ask: should such fraud be allowed "oncology" privileges?  How is what's false an improvement of quality of life?  But that is naturopathy.  Nothing said like that in this advertisement.

002. at the NDs' practice:

002.a. we're told Niesley is a Bastyr ND grad. and Dunn is a NUNM ND graduate;

002.b. and here's where it gets really interesting in terms of evidence:

002.b1. you have Bastyr claiming "science" upon naturopathy categorically, including homeopathy; so evidence is therein meaningless;

002.b2. you have NUNM claiming 'science vetted' upon the patently science-ejected;
so evidence is therein meaningless in Naturopathyland.

003. and how does acupuncture compare, by the way?

well, you have ND Dunn stating in her bio. linked to above "her practice incorporates many effective therapies including clinical nutrition, homeopathy, Chinese and western herbal medicine, and acupuncture."  So, when complete junk like homeopathy is just good, then whatever homeopathy is being equated with as just as good is actually JUNK.

004. and regarding "spirit":

let me ask a simple question: where is the evidence that they are treating spirit?  I greatly respect belief / faith, as a fundamental human right.  But, naturopaths, and reporters, do not have to right to falsely claim 'evidence subset treating spirit', not in any kind of legitimate modern scientific medical and oncology sense.