Andy Lewis on TNC's March Anti-Homeopathy Campaign

001. Andy Lewis writes at the Quackometer in "The Homeopaths and the Advertising Standards Authority" (2011-04-01):

"it is now the end of the Nightingale Collaboration’s first month of operation [...] set up to 'challenge misleading claims in healthcare advertising' [...] focusing on the bizarre world of pseudoscientific and superstitious medicine: an area that appears to get away with the most ludicrous health claims with little attention from any authority [...] the Nightingale Collaboration asked people to report homeopaths who are making unsubstantiated claims to the Advertising Standards Authority [...] it would appear that this campaign is likely to have far reaching consequences [...] it looks like this simple campaign could severely constrain the ability for quacks of all varieties to advertise their misleading claims on the web, without facing very serious consequences [...] the ASA received over a hundred and fifty complaints about over a hundred homeopath’s websites [...and warned them] 'you must remove any content from your website that claims directly or indirectly that homeopathy and homeopathic products can diagnose / treat / help health conditions' [...] battle lines have been drawn."

Note: this looks to be an interesting contest, and Andy has a lot of analysis of the UK consumer protection scene at the full post.

Quackometer Does It Again (2011-01-21): "Homeopathy is Classic Pseudoscience"

Andy Lewis at his website The Quackometer states in "When the Regulator Believes in Fairies, Who Protects the Public?" (2011-01-21):

"homeopathy is classic pseudoscience. As are most forms of alternative medicine. Being cowardly in saying so risks peoples' health, defrauds them by allowing government endorsement of useless products, and undermines our regulators abilities to carry out their duties to protect the public. Recognising that training is not the same as expertise would be a good first step. Real expertise comes from critical thinking and having an ability to understand the limitations of personal knowledge. Those are attributes that are nearly non-existent amongst practitioners of the pseudo-medical cults."

Note: wow.  Read the whole post, it's great.  Ah-hmmm, naturopathy anybody?

The Quackometer on Homeopathy: "Cult-Like" [and Parallels to Naturopathy]

here, I cite from a recent post at The Quackometer regarding homeopathy [see 001., below]; then, I suggest some similarities homeopathy has to naturopathy [see 002., below]; and I provide a specific example [see 003., below]:

001. Andy Lewis writes in "Escaping the Cult of Homeopathy" (2010-12-13):

"I would not be the first to suggest that believers in alternative medicine often display the traits of members of cults [...and] of all alternative medicines homeopathy, to me, looks the most cult-like [...e.g.] it defines itself in opposition to what it calls 'allopathy' and in doing so creates a straw man of what medicine is today [...] homeopathy is so strictly defined by its opposition to modern mainstream medicine that it will always lie at the fringes in a pseudoscientific bubble [...] it must attack and denounce alternatives – such as scientific medicine – without any form of compromise [...] the cult model explains why virtually no homeopaths have condemned the murderous practice of using sugar pills to treat fatal diseases like HIV and malaria [...this] thinking of the cult [...this] cult-like dark side of homeopathy [...this] pseudo-medical and superstitious cult [...homeopathy apostate] Wendy describes life inside the cult of homeopathy [...] Wendy talks about how the training for homeopaths is vital for creating the cult-like mentality [...] questioning was highly discouraged [...] 'my critical abilities were silenced within the first year – not by others – but because it would be considered judgmental in that society [...] I now see homeopathy as the disease.  I think it is a form of madness' [...]  Wendy has found the current sceptical blogging about homeopathy on the internet a useful tool in 'de-programming' and re-engaging with a critical approach to examining the claims of homeopathy."

Note: there are many parallels between homeopathy and naturopathy.  And I have, under oath, labeled naturopathy "cultic mystical weirdness", I must admit.

002. parallels:

It is a fact that: 

a) ND web pages often have a "FAQs" section rhetorically posing the question 'what is the difference between homeopathy and naturopathy?'

b) naturopathy labels modern medicine 'allopathy';

c) both homeopathy and naturopathy are based on science-ejected archaic / medieval ideas such as vitalism.

003. for example,  Lee, T.S. (ND Bastyr 1986) states in "What Is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2010-12-13]:

"what is the difference between a naturopath and a homeopath? [...] homeopaths use only the homeopathic approach, whereas naturopaths train in several forms of diagnosis and treatment, one of which is homeopathy [...which] stimulates the patient's vital force to help resolve the disease [...paralleling] the philosophy of naturopathic medicine: living things have an innate ability to heal themselves [coded vitalism].  Our vital force promotes self-cleansing, self-repair, and therefore self-healing [...] naturopathic treatments [...and] techniques and methods have long been respected throughout the world.  While modern allopathic medicine is a youngster of less than 200 years old, natural medicine has been the primary medicine used by most of the human community even into the 21st Century."

Note: this result came about by using google.com and web-searching >"what is the difference" homeopathy naturopathy<.  It was the second result.

The Quackometer on UK Chiropractic: "A Pseudoscientific Education"

here, I cite from a recent post at the Quackometer [see 001., below]:

001. Andy Lewis writes in "Chiropractors at War with Their Regulator, the GCC: The Statutory Regulation of Chiropractors Can No Longer Be Justified, Even if it Does Help Prevent Them Making Bogus Claims" (2010-11-01):

"this blog has opposed the statutory regulation of superstitious medical practices, such as homeopathy, and it would be hypocritical of me if I thought chiropractors should be an exception [(or naturopathy, in my view!)...] it was a big mistake to give official state recognition and regulation to a discredited, superstitious and pseudoscientific form of medical treatment [...] chiropractic theory has been shown to be nothing but mystical whimsy [...it is] a cult-like pseudomedical trade [...] it is not a mature profession as it cannot even agree on what the essential nature of their [attempted] profession is. The core concept of the chiropractic subluxation, that drives their philosophy and practice, has been rejected by the regulator [...] the Universities [...have] complicity in the deception that is much of chiropractic [...students] are misled into believing that what they are learning has an academic status that cannot be justified by reason or evidence [...it is] a pseudoscientific education."

002. sounds familiar:

this pseudoscientific education thang.

Andy Lewis on Integrative Medicine: Quackery, Pseudo-medicine and Anti-scientific Nonsense

the Quackometer [Andy Lewis] writes in "Prince’s Foundation for Integrated Health Closes" (2010-05-01):

"as predicted last week, Prince Charles Charity has closed amid claims of fraud, money laundering and misuse of charity status [...it promoted] quackery, University courses in nonsense and increased use of magic medicine in the NHS [...] the concept of integrated medicine is a trojan horse. Strip away the cosy rhetoric of caring for the 'whole person' and what you find is a payload of quackery, pseudo-medicine and anti-scientific nonsense. The FIH has been notorious for promoting absurd treatments including homeopathy, reiki and acupuncture despite the evidence overwhelming suggesting these are useless treatments [...this] has been a menace to the public understanding of science and its role in healthcare. It will not be missed by all those who care about science, reason and good health."

Note: great news.

Andy Lewis - Homeopathy is Untenable / Absurd [So I'm Wondering Why NANAA Falsely Calls It Science?]:

here, I quote from the Quackometer regarding homeopathy's nonscientific status [see 001., below]; and, drawing on my familiarity with naturopathy, I cite NANAA's as absurd position [see 002., below]:

001. the Quackometer Blog [Andy Lewis] recently wrote in "Homeopaths: Do You Really Want Statutory Regulation?" (2009-07-29):'

"homeopaths [being unregulated in the UK] have been free to indulge in whatever delusions they fancy [...free from the constraints of] plausibility and reliable evidence for anything [...encompassing] absurdities [...] homeopathy has failed in two hundred years to make any progression in showing that it is nothing other than a inert treatment based on pre-scientific and magical thinking [...] in the two hundred years since homeopathy was invented, our scientific understanding of medicine, chemistry and physics has moved on enormously and it clearly shows that homeopathy is not just implausible but is utterly contradicted by everything we know about the world. Homeopathy lies outside of reason and science. It is a pseudo-medicine and is just a placebo therapy. It is just not tenable to hold any other position [...it's] absurd treatment [...much like] the non existent foundations of much of chiropractic care [...that] vestigial remnant of Victorian back cracking quackery [...] chiropractors [now regulated] find themselves being held to the highest forms of professionalism and practice without an evidence base for pretty much anything they do."

Note: it is absurd to pose homeopathy as scientific [and naturopathy!].

002. the 'North American Naturopathic Absurdity Apparatus' [NANAA] labels their requisite homeopathy "clinical science", "medical science", "firmly science-based" and "health science":

002.a. "clinical science" per the North American ND licensing exam, NPLEX, in "About NPLEX";

002.b. "medical science" per the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges in "About Naturopathic Medicine"; also, the American Medical Student Association in "Welcome to AMSA's Naturopathic Medicine Interest Group!";

002.c. "firmly science-based" per Bastyr University states in "Naturopathic Medicine";

002.d. "health science" per the University of Bridgeport states in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs";

002.e. and just for S&G, Coward, S. (ND SCNM), Lewis, K. (ND SCNM) state in "Misconceptions Aside, Homeopathy Has Stood Test of Time" (2009-06-25), specifically regarding homeopathy:

"homeopathy is a 200-year-old medicinal science."

003. amazing.