Here, some quotes, further clarifications, and some musings:
001. Kate Masters writes at virginiamercury.com and nbc12.com* in "Virginia’s Naturopathic Doctors are Continuing a 15-year Fight for Licensure" (2021-01-05) [2021 archived]:
*The nbc12.com picture is a homeopathic vial of sucrose / lactose pellets.
001.a. There's the first paragraph:
We're told:
"For the past 15 years, Virginia’s naturopathic doctors have been on a quest for licensure by the state’s Department of Health Professions — a step that’s been taken by 23 other states and would allow them to diagnose and treat patients like many other medical providers. That goal has brought the debate around the field of naturopathic medicine — widely defined by practitioners as a system that emphasizes prevention and self-healing through natural therapies — to the state’s General Assembly [...]";
Now, keep in mind as this article puts perfume on this pig:
The Virginia's naturopathic doctor site, vaanp.org, states in "Overview" [saved 2021-01-05; 2021 archived]:
"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances [...] in the United States, the naturopathic medical profession’s infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing, national standards of practice, peer review, and a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...] naturopathic medicine is a scientifically proven and tested system of (successful) healthcare [...]";
So, there are some pretty adamant 'categorically science' claims. But they are false in two ways at least: what is distinctly naturopathic is science ejected or science-exterior [their principles of vitalism, supernaturalism, their activities of homeopathy and kind] and their categorical claim of science is within the same page contradicted by their statement of be being blended knowledge.
The blending statements include: "naturopathic medicine [...] blends centuries-old knowledge of natural therapies with current advances in the understanding of health and human systems [...] diverse techniques include modern and traditional, scientific and empirical methods [...] in addition to the basic medical sciences and conventional diagnostics, naturopathic education includes: therapeutic nutrition, botanical medicine, homeopathy, natural childbirth, classical Chinese medicine, hydrotherapy, naturopathic manipulative therapy, pharmacology, and minor surgery."
I call this the wine plus mud mixture, yet they claim -- if science is wine -- that overall the mixture is indeed wine. But, admittedly, they state that there's a shitload of mud in there too. And this is supposed to be medicine. But this shitty mixture is quite unlike what the article poses NDs status as, "like many other medical providers." NDs are not medical, they are naturopathic. They are not "like many other medical providers."
One of the best litmus tests of 'the naturopathic' is the NDs including homeopathy within their supposedly science-vetted domain. That is utter nonsense. This is junk thought at its pinnacle, getting dressed up in a tuxedo but underneath...still muddy junk thought. This is unlike all other mainstream healthcare in its sectarian falseness.
The author's expression "widely defined by practitioners as a system that emphasizes prevention and self-healing through natural therapies" is hyperlinked to Bastyr University. At Bastyr, you can find that same categorical science claim on the naturopathic, as "science-based". The full statement there is the epitome of nonsense: "Bastyr offers graduate and undergraduate degrees in science-based natural medicine that integrates mind, body, spirit, and nature." If you know your knowledge types and the methods that lead to them [epistemology], then quite obviously claiming that the supernatural is science-based is nonsense. Additionally, the "self-healing" via "nature" is a coding for the science-discarded concept of vitalism, also available at Bastyr. You'll notice above that VAANP does not clearly state that sectarian centerpiece at the heart of naturopathy though the page is titled "overview". Actually, for this current year, VAANP seems to have erased that vitalism from their pages, which I have amassed here. Only a few months ago on vaanp.org we were told "homeopathic medicines, when properly prescribed, affect the body’s 'vital force' and strengthen its innate ability to heal". Oh what a tangled web we weave...
Inevitably, the position of naturopathy is that anything is science and that knowledge distinctions are meaningless. As is truthfulness and clarity. This sounds a little dangerous for someone to be holding as a view while practicing physicianship. It also sounds very dangerous for freedom of belief, wherein an objective fact is now conflated with a personal belief choice. The latter I term epistemic fascism, because it abrogates personal freedom with a false position that one doesn't have a choice.
And lets legislate it, so it is all protected...
001.b. Other science claims of VAANP, from my detailed Appendix I.03.a.12., include:
(archived here,
http://web.archive.org/web/20120320221133/http://www.vaanp.org/licensure)[vsc 2013-04-02]
(for the archive.org history of this page, click here,
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.vaanp.org/licensure)
So, again, licensed falsehood by way of an unnecessary 'failed medieval paradigm' that conflates knowledge types and basically LIES by omission. Yes, the claim that homeopathy is a clinical science. Like astrology is a science. Or alchemy.
002. Some NDs mentioned in the article:
002.a. There's Giardenelli, S. (ND NUNM 2010):
Whose bio. page says she is "honoring the basic principles of natural medicine" without actually any mention of them. She does not describe naturopathy's principles, apparently, on any page. Because what's informed consent anyway when facing the public? What's veracity for anyway?
Well, she's an NUNM graduate and at NUNM you can find a page where they tell you a science-ejected life force running the body is a fact. That LinkedIn page calls her a "medical director", by the way.
002.b. There's Rodriguez, M. (ND Bastyr) who has up two very NOT science-based pages, whose contents the article in no way mentions, including:
002.b.i. "Distance Healing Offerings" [2021 archived]:
"I offer several services from the comfort of your home either over the phone or internet: naturopathic medicine, distance energy healing, shamanic healing, family constellation work, emotional freedom technique (EFT) and past life regression [...] In the initial naturopathic visit, we go over a thorough health history to include: past medical history, family history, social history, diet, lifestyle, supplements and pertinent labs. I will then customize a treatment plan for you that may involve: nutrition and dietary recommendations, herbal medicine, lifestyle ‘homework’, homeopathy, stress management techniques [...] energy healing: as mentioned above, I combine several energy healing modalities in my distance healing sessions. After we set the intention, I open up a protected and intentional healing space where I am able to tap into your energy field and get a sense of what is ready to shift. I will give you verbal guidance of visualizations and periodically check in with you about physical sensations or impressions. I am heavily influenced by my training in shamanic healing and this informs all of my energy healing sessions. I will often utilize my rattle to journey on your behalf and get information to support your healing";
Wow. Woo-nderful. Of course, this is not the energy of the science-based. This is some kind of belief system[s] falsely employing the term energy, which has a specific scientific context. And its amazing what telecommunications can accomplish these days. Ting-tang-walla-wall-bing-bang.
"during the healing portion, you will be guided through a healing meditation using visualization. I work the the energy healing systems of: craniosacral therapy, chakra balancing, conscious systems, family constellation work, and shamanism to facilitate: chakra clearing, repair of bioenergetic structure, soul/life force retrieval, dissolution of cords, and clearing of energy blocks from trauma (ancestral, current lifetime, past life) [...]";
So, LIFE FORCE = SOUL.
002.b.ii. "My Healing Approach" [2021 archived], and here we get down to brass tacks:
"Dr. Marie taps into this mind-body connection with a potent blend of energetic healing modalities: shamanic energy work, traditional Mayan healing, craniosacral therapy, myofascial release, and family constellation work. By freeing up blocks in the energy body, she helps your life force energy (chi in Chinese medicine ‘prana’ in ayurvedic medicine or ‘vis medicatrix naturae’ in naturopathic medicine) to flow more freely. One of the tenets of Naturopathic Medicine is the healing power of nature and the body’s own ability to self-correct or heal. Mind-body healing is a wonderful adjunct to any physical modality as it works directly with our body’s own self-healing wisdom. Most people leave a session feeling clear, relaxed, centered more aware and connected [...]";
Ah, them sectarian roots. I love when NDs provide Rosetta Stones or synonym chains to help decode all their layerings. Her, life force energy = chi = prana = VMN [Latin for healing power of nature] = soul. Such science-ejected or science-exterior roots. And as I've said many times, I'm all for freedom of belief. But, what we get through naturopathy is a kind of epistemic and ontologic muddle that makes NO SENSE and has NO JUSTIFICATION in terms of the factual world. Scientifically speaking, imaginary sources of physiology and imaginary fixes of such.
"family constellation work: this system of healing is entirely energetic – it can be done individually or in a group setting. Constellation work addresses the energy level or the ‘soul’ of a family [...]";
Really. So when the article states "Most recently,
both the House and Senate considered bills during the 2020 legislative session that
would have mandated the Board of Medicine to develop regulations for licensing
naturopathic doctors in Virginia [...] while both bills failed in committee, the Senate instructed the Board of Health Professions to conduct a study on regulating naturopathic doctors - one that concluded with a unanimous recommendation for licensure by the board's Regulatory Research Committee during a meeting in August.." That's crazy: licensed falsehood. It's like licensing civil engineers who think two plus two equals nine. "'The research committee recommended licensing'." Completely incompetent research IMHO.
003. Sundries the article states:
"Virginia's naturopathic doctors plan to carry their fight for licensure into 2021, arguing they could play a critical role in expanding access to care for patients."
But the QUALITY of the care matters. NONSENSE as care matters. Unethical sectarian pseudoscience is not a care option in this day and age. The erosion of medical, professional, and scientific standards is the result. What happens is the protection of grifting.
"[the sponsoring lawmaker states] "It's sad to see that politics is what drove this decision, rather than the sound, objective information that was presented by the committee' [...]";
Ah, no. Actualy doing and end run around rationality, science, and medicine by licensing naturopaths is MOST POLITICAL. Naturopathy is the undoing of sound, objective information.
003. Some redeeming qualities of the article:
There is some room spend on the perspective of the state medical society. We're told:
"Objections from physicians' groups like the Medical Society
of Virginia, state chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics and seven other
medical associations that signed a letter opposing licensure for NDs [...] ";
Yeah, politics...my arse. Such a slap in the face to allow grifters to grift with a .gov shield. I completely agree with the MSV position that "licensing would give naturopathic practitioners a level of credibility that the profession doesn't deserve."
But, overall, there's just too much false balance and charity towards nonsense without calling it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment