The Cullen-Snyder Framework (v.1.0) Application #003 – University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine Curriculum and Materials 1997-2004

here, the third application of the C-S Framework:

001. The Source Documents:

This is a bunch of stuff totaling 111 pages as a single PDF that I titled “Connecticut Archival Naturopathy at UB - 1997, 1998, 2000, 2004.”  I include each source at Archive.org to accommodate replication. The scanned documents were pared down.

The perpetual [Archive.org saved] list: 

“Pages 1-4 [this]Table of Contents; Pages 5-33 Scanned “1997-1998 UB Catalog”; Page 34 1998 web page - “Course Description”; Pages 35-37 1998 web page - “Basic Sciences”; Pages 38-42 1998 web page - “Clinical Sciences”; Pages 43-46 1998 web page - “Naturopathic Practice / Organ Systems”; Pages 47-49 1998 web page - “Physical Medicine”; Pages 50-51 1998 web page - “Clinical Education”; Pages 52-53 1998 web page - “Botanical Medicine”; Pages 54-55 1998 web page - “Homeopathic Medicine”; Pages 56-57 1998 web page - “Naturopathic Principles and Practice”; Pages 58-59 1998 web page - “Psychology”; Page 60 1998 web page - “Clinical Nutrition”; Pages 61-62 1998 web page - “Naturopathic Obstetrics”; Pages 63-64 1998 web page - “Oriental Medicine”; Page 65 1998 web page - “Research”; Page 66 1998 web page - “Questions”; Pages 67-100 Scanned “2000-2001 UB College of Naturopathic Medicine Catalog”; Page 101 2004 web page - “College of Naturopathic Medicine About UB”; Page 102 2004 web page - “College of Naturopathic Medicine Accreditation”; Pages 103-104 2004 web page - “College of Naturopathic Medicine Homepage”; Page 105 2004 web page - “Today’s Naturopathic Physician”; Page 106 2004 web page - “Guiding Principle #1”; Page 107 2004 web page - “Guiding Principle #2”; Page 108 2004 web page - “Guiding Principle #3”; Page 109 2004 web page - “Guiding Principle #4”; Page 110 2004 web page - “Guiding Principle #5”; Page 111 2004 web page - “Guiding Principle #6”.

002. A Word on the Framework and Its Application:

The Framework is a fusion of my critical epistemology / scientific skepticism and Tim Snyder’s 'freedom to' / political philosophy.  The Framework version used is 1.0.  The application is achieved through a task by way of ChatGPT, wherein the 2025-07 default NLP model set is asked to “apply the attached framework model docx to the attached pdf and generate a detailed report." This time I specified that the report include itemized naturopathy science categorizations and itemized naturopathy contents that are not scientifically supported such as vitalism and homeopathy.  In large part, my interest in using this method is to see if what is generated jibes with my knowledge of the sources.  Overall, I find the results robust and poignant.

003. The "Evaluation Report:

“Here is a detailed report applying the Cullen-Snyder Framework for Evaluative Analysis of Naturopathy with Regard to Freedom to 'the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine curriculum and materials (from the 1997–2004 archives)'.

I. Epistemic Audit (Cullen-Based Analysis)

1. Science Camouflage Index

This metric evaluates how extensively non-scientific or pseudoscientific practices are framed using scientific language or embedded alongside scientific content.

Category	Description	Examples from UB Curriculum	Index Score (0–5)
Mixed Scientific and Pseudoscientific Claims	Scientific terms (e.g., physiology, pathology) are co-listed with non-empirical systems	Homeopathy, Vis Medicatrix Naturae, Botanical Medicine, Naturopathic Manipulative Therapy appear beside Clinical Nutrition and Pathology	4.5
Pseudoscience Framed in Scientific Language	Vague metaphysical concepts are cloaked in medical phrasing	Phrases like “inherent self-healing process,” “intelligent vital force,” “ordered and intelligent healing”	5.0
Conflation of Traditional with Scientific	Oriental Medicine, Hydrotherapy, and Homeopathy are described as both empirical and scientific	Described as “modern and traditional, scientific and empirical methods”	4.5

Composite Science Camouflage Index Score: 4.7 / 5

2. Institutional Legitimacy Score

This reflects the extent to which academic/professional legitimacy is claimed and presented despite low empirical support.

Criteria	Evidence from UB Materials	Evaluation
Claimed Professional Status	Curriculum claims ND as “primary health care” and “portal of entry”	Overstates clinical equivalence to MDs
Credentialed Structure	4-year doctoral program, structured around clinical/lab sciences	Emulates medical school format
Scientific Accreditation Claims	Uses terms like "national professional educational standards" and mentions Council on Naturopathic Medical Education	Not recognized by mainstream medical institutions

Institutional Legitimacy Score: 2 / 5

II. Itemized Science-Based and Non-Science-Based Content

A. Science-Based Curriculum Elements

Category	Courses	Notes
Basic Sciences	Anatomy I & II, Physiology I & II, Biochemistry, Histology, Embryology	Standard medical sciences
Clinical Sciences	Pathology I & II, Diagnostic Imaging, Immunology, Pharmacology I & II, Public Health, Emergency Procedures	Empirically grounded
Clinical Nutrition	Nutrition I & II	Scientific basis depending on content
Microbiology & Lab Diagnosis	Microbiology, Lab Diagnosis I & II	Accepted scientific foundations

B. Non-Scientific or Pseudoscientific Curriculum Elements

Category	Courses/Content	Reason for Classification
Vitalism	“Vis Medicatrix Naturae” (The Healing Power of Nature)	Based on metaphysical assumptions; no empirical mechanism
Homeopathy	Homeopathy I, II, III + 144 elective hours	Lacks scientific plausibility; widely discredited
Naturopathic Manipulative Therapy	Manipulative Therapy I & II	Based on alternative theories lacking RCT validation
Oriental Medicine	72 hours on Traditional Chinese Medicine	Largely untestable diagnostic framework (Qi, meridians)
Minor Surgery (Naturopathic Framing)	Elective courses only	Techniques valid, but context/practice setting often lacking regulatory oversight
Naturopathic Obstetrics	Course + electives	Concern due to low empirical support for natural childbirth under naturopathic care alone
Botanical Medicine	Botanical Medicine I & II + electives	Mixed evidence; variable standardization and dosage control
Medical Philosophy & Spiritual Factors	Courses on “Physician Heal Thyself,” “Doctor as Teacher,” spiritual health development	Not scientific; philosophical or personal belief systems

III. Freedom Impact Matrix (Snyder-Based Analysis)

Freedom Dimension	Impact of Naturopathy at UB	Score (–2 to +2)
Sovereignty	Encourages autonomy, but informed consent is compromised due to misinformation (e.g., homeopathy, vitalism)	–1
Unpredictability	High variability in therapeutic outcomes; low reproducibility for non-scientific methods	–2
Mobility	Expands healthcare options, though legal recognition varies by state; potential risks if patients forgo standard care	0
Factuality	Significant epistemic conflation obscures truth and undermines informed choice	–2
Solidarity	May undermine public trust in healthcare and herd-based interventions like vaccination	–1

Freedom Impact Summary: Overall negative impact on Snyder’s freedom dimensions, primarily due to factual ambiguity and institutional undermining of science-based norms.

IV. Institutional Evaluation (Freedom & Scientific Integrity)

Science Literacy and Positive Freedom

• Obstruction: By introducing students to pseudoscience under the guise of scientific training, the institution may erode public understanding of evidence-based healthcare.

Erosion Vectors (per Cullen)

• Pseudoscientific Infiltration: The institutional embedding of concepts like vitalism, homeopathy, and energy medicine erodes scientific norms and blurs lines of academic legitimacy.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine presents a blended epistemology where legitimate biomedical training is extensively interwoven with pseudoscientific and metaphysical ideologies. While the curriculum includes substantial coursework in anatomy, pathology, and diagnosis, it also devotes hundreds of hours to practices that lack scientific validation.

Key Findings

• High Science Camouflage Index (4.7): Pseudoscience is deeply embedded within a scientific structure.
• Low Institutional Legitimacy Score (2): Framed as scientific, but lacking in external professional and academic validation.
• Negative Freedom Impact: Primarily in factuality, unpredictability [see my comments], and sovereignty.

Recommendations

• Separate scientific from non-scientific coursework in course catalogs and curricula.
• Require disclaimers where evidence is lacking.
• Increase focus on critical thinking and evidence appraisal.
• Reassess inclusion of courses that do not meet scientific thresholds.”

004. My Comments on the Report:

Unpredictability, again, is not well managed by the model’s processes.  High amounts of unpredictability within Snyder’s model, as regards good values being assembled in varied ways due to an individual’s preferences, is WANTED.  Of course, not so in healthcare in terms of the knowledge processes and parameters, and particularly as regards the VALUES that are expected.  So, such is labeled by the model as a negative, which is right, yet, I don’t think the distinction or the complete appreciation of the Snyderian sense is occurring.  But, besides that, overall, the findings are spot-on.

005. Personally:

This all occurred in MY LIFE through TITLE IV at this school from 1998-2002.  The school within UB was closed, but the nonsense continues at naturopathy programs with such categorically misleading names as National University of Health Sciences and Sonoran University of Health Sciences here in the U.S.