3 NUNM Naturopaths Antithetically Argue for Scientific Evidence in The Permanente Journal: Compartmentalization, Hypocrisy, Misinformation

here, when neurons, individually and collectively, don't seem to be integrated you get a field of cowpies:

001. in The Permanente Journal, which calls itself a "peer-reviewed journal of medical science and social science in medicine" [science, science, science -- really!], there's the 2020-09 article "Pertussis Infection in a Naturopathic Primary Care Setting: Reflection on a Case"

[abstract here]

[Garofalo, L., Corn, J., & Sperandeo, M. (2020). Pertussis Infection in a Naturopathic Primary Care Setting: Reflection on a Case. The Permanente journal, 24, 10.7812/TPP/20.065. https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/20.065]

NDs Garofalo, Corn, and Sperandeo state:

"continued collaboration with public health programs and conventional clinicians is necessary to improve medical science training and vaccine advocacy in the field of naturopathic medicine";

interesting.  The authors seem to state that external influences can change how NDs think in terms of science, but not internal aka at their schools and in their training.  Have they given up on that in terms of science?!?!?!

"any subsequent education [of vaccine-hesitant parents] that is needed should be specific to each vaccine in question, delivered without judgment, and rooted in scientific evidence";

ah, that's called MEDICINE.  But it is is antithetical to naturopathy.

002. examples of naturopathy's essential antiscience position, by way of the naturopathy school alma maters of the authors:

[the LinkedIn of ND Garofalo, the practice site of ND Corn, and the NUNM page of ND Sperandeo state that they have their NDs from NUNM]

002.a. NUNM's blanket/categorical science claims:

which I have collected here. One example: "licensed  naturopathic  doctors  complete  a  rigorous,  four-­year,  in-residence,  science-based, post­graduate  medical  education "[2020 archived].

obviously, the categorical claim that naturopathy is "science-based."

002.b. the "distinguishing" science-ejected at the heart of naturopathy:

one part of this is vitalism, which NUNM copious provides language towards and which NUNM on the same page falsely claims survives objective, scientific scrutiny.

all there, in its pseudoscientific, misinforming, pseudomedical, ignorant glory.

003. therein:

003.a. an inconsistency that is quite without intellectual integrity due to the compartmentalization, an hypocrisy of great extent, misinformation galore.  Who peer-reviews this crap?

003.b. a field full of cowpies:

and they seem to be arguing that the only way to fix us is not for NDs themselves to fix naturopathy in terms of their wacky bases and schooling, but to bring NDs into the fold.  Odd for a 'field' that holds 'treat the root' as one of the main principles.  It's like arguing that the only way to get bridges not to fall is to collaborate with us after we've been taught in fake bridge building schools how to build crap bridges.