ND Parker's NAET, Homeopathy, CST and Naturopathy: Falsely Labeled Science-Ejected Nonsense

here, I cite from the web pages of an ND who uses NAET, homeopathy, and CST [see 001.a., below]; and claims naturopathy is science, while based upon the supernatural and vitalistic science-exterior [see 001.b, below]; claims homeopathy is a science [see 001.c. and d., below]; and details NAET [see 001.e., below]; then, I provide an ACTUAL scientific context for these quite false science claims upon nonscience and quite weird therapeutic and diagnostic activities that have neither efficacy nor plausible rationale [see 002., below]; then I muse [see 003., below]:

001. Parker, R.M. (ND Bastyr 2007) states [all vsc 2011-02-05]:

001.a. in "Rebecca Maya Parker, ND":

"Rebecca Maya Parker, ND is a board-certified naturopathic doctor [...] a graduate of Bastyr University and the New England School of Homeopathy [...] who specializes in classical homeopathy and NAET allergy elimination [...] in addition to homeopathy, Dr. Parker uses NAET allergy elimination [and] craniosacral therapy [CST]."

Note: so, she is of Bastyr, into homeopathy, NAET, and CST.  Bastyr's clinical arm is into homeopathy and CST, and I'm wondering how much, if any, NAET.

001.b. in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medical schools include extensive training in medical science and diagnosis [...] Bastyr University [her alma mater...] is one of the world's leading academic centers for advancing knowledge in the natural health sciences."

Note: so, there's the blanket "science" claim over naturopathy.  And the claim of "natural". So, you'd think that if it's all science, and if the education was so "leading" and "extensive", that the actual naturopathy-stuff would be able to survive scientific scrutiny.

Furthermore, on the same page, ND Parker explains the bases of naturopathy:

"naturopathic doctors follow these principles: [#1] nature has a tendency toward health and healing [NHTTHH]. Naturopathic doctors support this tendency in their patients [coded vitalism]. Naturopathic doctors treat their patients as whole people. The body, mind, and spirit are not separate from each other [some kind of sectarian supernaturalism]."

Note: there is no vital force, live force, vitalism, vitalistic, or medicatrix mentioned on ANY web page of this practice, that I've found.  So much for informed consent. But do not fear, that is what NHTTHH means, preponderantly. So, claimed within science is the nonscientific / science-exterior / science-ejected vitalistic and supernatural.  I'm not sure what it means to not be able to separate a body from a mind from a spirit.  It's a belief of some kind.  Of course, bodies and minds have their own sciences to study them, and the spirit stuff is religiosity of a kind.

001.c. in "Homeopathy":

"homeopathy is a scientific method of triggering your body’s self-healing potential [YBSHP, coded vitalism]."

Note: the vitalistic is again coded. Being a classical homeopath, ND Parker is being quite opaque here since they are sooooo Hahnemann-literal in classical homeopathy.

001.d. in "Dear New Patient":

"homeopathy is a scientific method of triggering your body’s self-healing potential."

Note: that science label again upon homeopathy.  That coded vitalism again.  Yes, that's a pediatric intake form explaining homeopathy and NAET.

001.e. in "NAET":

"NAET (Nambudripad’s Allergy Elimination Technique) is a systematic way of training the body to recognize which substances are not toxic [...] NAET is a safe, natural, and remarkably effective method of removing allergies and other reactions against healthy substances [...] NAET allergy elimination is an effective treatment for conditions such as: asthma, migraines, chronic sinusitis, chronic ear infections, ADD, ADHD, autism, fibromyalgia, and much more. Dr. Parker has been trained in the practice of NAET by Dr. Devi Nambudripad, MD, DC, LAc, PhD—who developed NAET by combining techniques from her expertise as a medical doctor, a chiropractor, and an acupuncturist."

Note: NAET galore, with lots of promise of efficacy for many quite serious diseases.

002. what ACTUAL science says [not that 'naturopathic science laxity'] about NAET, homeopathy, CST:

002.a. the [pedestrian!] Wikipedia has, as its entry for "NAET" [saved 2011-02-05], this to say [and, by the way, I've never been a contributor to Wikipedia]:

"Nambudripad Allergy Elimination Technique (NAET) is an alternative medicine technique intended as a treatment for allergies and chemical sensitivities. Founded in 1983 by Devi Nambudripad [...] NAET draws on ideas from acupuncture, applied kinesiology, and allergy medicine. NAET attracts controversy due to the lack of scientific justification of the therapeutic approach, and absence of supporting scientific evidence of its clinical effectiveness."

Note: ouch, the reality STINGS US PRECIOUS.  NAET is a bogus clinical parlor trick.

002.b. the 2009 evidence check on homeopathy by the UK government:

states that homeopathy is actually so implausible and so without efficacy that no further study is needed to whole-heartedly dismiss it on scientific and ethical grounds.

002.c. and regarding craniosacral therapy, MD Barrett states at Quackwatch in "Why Craniosacral Therapy Is Silly":

"the scientific viewpoint: I do not believe that craniosacral therapy has any therapeutic value. Its underlying theory is false because the bones of the skull fuse by the end of adolescence and no research has ever demonstrated that manual manipulation can move the individual cranial bones [...] in 2002, two basic science professors at the University of New England College of Osteopathic Medicine concluded: 'our own and previously published findings suggest that the proposed mechanism for cranial osteopathy is invalid and that interexaminer (and, therefore, diagnostic) reliability is approximately zero. Since no properly randomized, blinded, and placebo-controlled outcome studies have been published, we conclude that cranial osteopathy should be removed from curricula of colleges of osteopathic medicine and from osteopathic licensing examinations.' I certainly agree! In fact, I believe that most practitioners of craniosacral therapy have such poor judgment that they should be delicensed."

Note: ouch, again precious.

003. the knowledge-type disease of naturopathy [perhaps why all this happens in the first place -- the root cause]:

Bastyr, the alma mater of ND Parker, has a marketing slogan for naturopathy that states "Bastyr At a Glance" [vsc 2011-02-05]:

"Bastyr University  [...has] a multidisciplinary curriculum in science-based natural medicine [...] Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature [coded vitalism]. A pioneer in natural [coded supernaturalism] medicine since its inception, Bastyr continues to be in the forefront of developing the model for 21st-century medicine [as if the past is now future]."

What's happened in that 'knowledge model' is that science has been redefined -- without explicitly stating so --  to include what science can't include.  I've labeled this phenomenon 'epistemic conflation', the blending of knowledge types.  So, by way of Bastyr's language and my knowledge of the contents of the naturopathic belief system, Bastyr decrees that science contains the science-ejected supernatural and vitalistic.

With science no longer requiring evidence of a rigorous scientific nature [not to pun], it is no wonder that NDs do crap stuff and claim it is science.  And I'll make an emphasis here that the practitioner's experience and the patient's feedback do not constitute scientific evidence.  Such is anecdote, the weakest quality / kind of evidence / knowledge.

Knowing how meaningless the term science is, in reality, as regards 'the naturopathic', it is no wonder that NAET, CST, homeopathy and the vitalistic-spiritistic are falsely claimed as science by naturopathyland.

Orac on the B.U.-G.U. Partnership - Quackademic Pseudoscience (2011-01-26)

here, I cite from a recent Respectful Insolence post on naturopathy [see 001., below]; then, I add some thoughts of my own [see 002., below]:

001. Orac writes in "The 'Integration' of Pseudoscience into Medicine Continues Apace" (2011-01-26):

"there are many forces that conspire to insert sectarian versions of medicine into bastions of scientific medicine [...] 'quackademic medicine' [...or] 'complementary and alternative medicine' (CAM) or 'integrative medicine' (IM) [...] its infiltration into various academic medical centers has been one of the more alarming developments I've noted over the last several years [...it is] in reality nothing more than 'integrating' pseudoscience with science, quackery with medicine [...] prescientific understanding of the world with science, religious faith healing [...] and magic with reality [...] the 'integration' of quackery with science-based medicine [hear, hear...] if you want to see [such] 'integration' behold the academic 'integration' model championed by Georgetown University, [once!] a school of science-based medicine, and Bastyr University, a school of naturopathy [...] that's right. Georgetown is partnering with schools of pseudoscience [...] I think that medical students should be taught about CAM modalities, but they should be taught about them from a the perspective of the state of the science, the evidence, and clinical trials. They should be taught about skepticism and critical thinking [hear, hear...] institutions like Georgetown are betraying science-based medicine by being so open to the point of its brains falling out [...by] partnering with Bastyr to integrate nonsense with sense, pseudoscience with science, and quackery with medicine."

Note: I COMPLETELY concur.

002. my thoughts:

I know a heck of a lot about naturopathy. I went to one of their schools for four years [lured in by false labels], left it in 2002, and I've been maintaining a database on naturopathy ever since then.

Naturopathy still fascinates me in its position as what I call an 'unethical sectarian pseudoscience'.

Let me parse Bastyr's marketing slogan, as a microcosm of what naturopathy's MO is. 

A Google.com web search with the parameters "body mind spirit nature Bastyr" [without the quotes] gets you to results that include, first on the list, Bastyr's entry [which the University penned, obviously though I'm not sure if USNWP gets paid to advertise the school] in U.S. News and World Report [saved 2011-01-26] which states:

"Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature [...] respecting the healing power of nature and recognizing that body, mind and spirit are intrinsically inseparable [...included is the program for] doctor of naturopathic medicine."

There's a lot said in those few words.  You have the label "science" overarching it all: science subset naturopathy.  You have supernaturalism within that: naturopathy subset supernaturalism.  You have some kind of conflated belief system which melds / conflates that supernaturalism with, apparently, everything.  And the BIG THING, that they are so good at, is coding their underlying sectarian belief in a 'purposeful life spirit' [vitalism, teleology, supernaturalism] in deceptively naturalistic language.  Their "nature" and the "healing power of nature" is that sectarian belief, coded.  Do not expect transparency on that matter, for the most part -- it gets in the way of their growth.

So, overall, naturopathy's claim is that the profoundly science-ejected is within science / science-based / survives scientific scrutiny.  That is absurd, irrational, and insane.

It is naturopathy.  It is fraud.  It is a violation of human rights.

And Naturocrit continues:

because naturopathy falsely labels the supernatural natural, the science-ejected and science-exterior science, sectarian articles of faith objective fact, and OVERALL trades on this falsehood and absurdity academically and clinically particularly across the U.S. and Canada.

And that is not just completely wrong, it is illegal.

ND Ferguson and Bastyr's 'Nonscience Is Science NaturopaTHICK Permissiveness' - Youtube 2008, Peterson's College Guide 2009

here, I cite from a Bastyr ND's Youtube video [see 001., below]; then, from Peterson's College Guide where Bastyr advertises [see 002., below]:

001. Ferguson, T.M. (ND Bastyr 2007) states in "Science Supports Naturopathic Healing" (posted 2008-12-12)] [vsc 2010-12-10]:

"[the video's textual description] Dr. Todd Ferguson on how science and research shows naturopathic methods are effective ways of healing [...from the video itself, narrator] 'are treatments in naturopathic medicine supported by scientific research?' [Ferguson] 'Ah, yeah [..] it sort of depends on how you define science [...] 3000 years of trial and era would be considered, in my mind, science.  But I think what you're getting at is more the modern type of science, and yes [...] many naturopathic concepts actually have a lot of research in them [...] yes there is a lot of research if you look in the right place."

[here's the link as a Youtube embed]

.

.

Note: science, science, science.  Wow, so, this product of Bastyr University states, basically, that knowledge and habits from the prescientific era are INDEED scientific.  That is quite generous.  It is also quite wrong.  Hmmmm: 'the Earth to me seems flat' said the cave man, 'therefore that is as scientific to naturopathy as the actuality that by modern methods we know the Earth to be round [roughly].'  Such is naturopaTHICK thought.

002. Peterson's College Guide 2009 [which I consider to be a form of 'false advertisement / commerce inducement'] states in "Bastyr University School of Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-12-11]:

"Bastyr’s fully accredited four- to five-year Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.) program is internationally renowned for its rigorous, science-based curriculum [...] a distinct multidisciplinary, science-based approach [...] students receive a thorough foundation in the basic medical sciences [...] basic science studies [...] the field of natural health sciences [...] scientifically trained naturopathic physicians [...] science major-level chemistry [...] science major-level biology [...] with an emphasis on understanding the mind, body, spirit, and nature."

Note: so, we're told that within science is the supernatural.  This isn't true.  And it hasn't been for a couple hundred years.  But, we can see from Ferguson's example, in naturopathyland, ANYTHING is science [including especially the supernatural].

003. what "nature" is contextually in naturopathy:

Broadly speaking, in naturopathy, "nature" is the "healing power of nature".  Bastyr explains this foundation-to-naturopathy in "Principles of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-12-11]:

"[the first and foremost] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae): naturopathic medicine recognizes the body's inherent ability, which is ordered and intelligent, to heal itself. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery, and to facilitate and augment this healing ability."

Note: and that's all you get.  You have not been properly informed, along the lines of professionalism.

But, if you go to Oregon's .gov site which is the 'trunk of the naturopathic tree' [Bastyr is an offspring of Oregon's NCNM], you'll get some transparency [along with absurdity].  There you will see that "nature" for naturopathy, in its principles, is the science-ejected concept known as vitalism [ejected from science for, charitably, 100 years and more].

004. so what to make of this:

the pattern is obvious: person educated wrongly / vitimized by an institution goes on to Youtube and espouses that institutions huge falsehoods / errors for the world to see.  Said institution continues its racket through advertisement via college guides.

Naturopathy's Essential Science-Ejected Vitalism via ND Tara Johnie Shelby

here, I cite an ND's expressed vitalistic and supernatural premises [which are science-ejected!]:

001. Shelby, T.J. (ND Bastyr 2008) states in "Tara Johnie Shelby, ND, LM" [vsc 2010-09-15]:

001.a. naturopathy's vitalism per:

"naturopathic principles: [#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae).  The healing power of nature is the inherent self-organizing and healing process of living systems. Naturopathic medicine recognizes this healing process to be ordered and intelligent [teleological!]. It is the naturopathic physician's role to support, facilitate and augment this process [...and now comes the contextualization] naturopathic therapeutic order: stimulate the vis medicatrix naturae [...aka] 'qi', 'prana', 'life force' [...] the force that moves us towards health; it is the essence that invigorates us. Some modalities that we utilize to stimulate the 'vis' include hydrotherapy, exercise, yoga, mediation, craniosacral therapy, energy medicine and homeopathy [powerful stuff!]."

Note: and, of course, the ND speaks of the "science-based nature of the medicine [...having] studied the medical science [...having] knowledge in conventional medical sciences [...and reveals] these principles, along with the medical science, are what guides my own medical practice today."  Bastyr itself, her alma mater, is well-know for this nonsense statement: "Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature [yes, supernaturalism and vitalism]."  

Yes, the cultic thought of naturopathy claims that within science is nonscience.

002. of course, though vitalism is science-ejected and defines naturopathy / naturopathy couches itself in the science-ejected, it falsely labels its entirety "science."  

Shelby also falsely places supernaturalism within "science" on the above web page. We're told by the ND: 

"my tools range from herbs, nutrition, homeopathy, physical manipulation, supplementation, awakening one's spirit as well as pharmaceuticals and surgery [!!!...and per naturopathy's defining principles, #4] health or disease comes from a complex interaction of mental, emotional, spiritual, physical etc."

So, I reiterate my overall label: 

"the epistemic conflation of a school of thought claiming to be scientific / the science that ain't science."

Would one want SURGERY if the surgeon cannot tell the difference between a scientific fact / concept and a sectarian figmentation / delusion / fallacy?

Not me.

Wherein Nonsense Metastasizes - Bastyr. U.'s New California Branch

here, I cite from the Bothell-Reporter / Kenmore-Reporter regarding Bastyr University's ND program expansion [see 001., below]; then, I dig up the grand old lie [see 002., below]:

001. in "Kenmore's Bastyr University to Open California Branch" [2010-08-13], the B-R / K-R states:

"offering the school's doctor of naturopathic medicine degree, Kenmore's Bastyr University plans to open a branch campus in the state of California, according to university President Daniel K. Church [...] 'we are thrilled to expand the university’s presence and provide prospective students greater access to Bastyr’s widely acclaimed naturopathic medicine program,' Church said [...] the state of California has experienced a 250-percent increase in the number of practicing naturopathic doctors over the last four years. Today, there are more than 400 licensed naturopathic doctors in California with approximately 350 actively practicing."

Note: that's a lot of woo.  "Widely acclaimed?"  No, widely misplaced acclaim -- unless irrationality and sectarian pseudomedical beliefs disguised as science-survivable are now exemplars.

002. as for my experience, a long time ago [1997 and still ticking], I trusted BU along with other AANP member schools as the AANP-Alliance to actually be describing themselves accurately and rationally.  Here's my most memorable lie by BU et al., wherein an ND is described as:

"naturopathic physician's are the modern day science based primary care doctor [...] it is not a belief system."

Note: yet, the principle idea at the heart of naturopathy -- which an ND is obligated to by oath -- is a belief that is science-ejected.

All this nonsense is still amazing to me.

Dr. Oz, an Honorary Bastyr Doctorate, and Their Misrepresentation of Naturopathy's 'HPN Primary Principle' - Mission Accomplished.

here, I cite from a recent print edition of Naturopathic Doctor News and Review [NDNR] regarding Dr. Mehmet Oz's apparent ignorance of naturopathy's "healing power of nature" [HPN] primary principle [see 001., below; I've added a note at the end of this post as 2011-10-09 appendage, below]; and then, I provide some transparency and non-bullshit per HPN, naturopathy, and where it sits in terms of actual science [see 002., below]:

001.a. NDNR writes in "NDNR Interview: Dr. Mehmet Oz Comments on Naturopathic Medicine and His Recent Honorary Doctorate" [NDNR, 2010-08]:

001.a1. "Dr. Mehmet Oz [MD UPSM 1986] vice chair and professor of surgery at Columbia University [and his wife...] recently received honorary doctorate degrees from Bastyr University [BU...which he calls] 'a wonderful validation [...] gratifying [...] an affirmation [...from] the minds that I admire most in alternative and progressive medicine' [...making him now] part of the professional natural medical community."

001.a2. "[NDNR] you seem to embrace the six principles of naturopathic medicine [...Oz] to understand and embrace these principles [...] like the healing power of nature [...] you don't need a huge lecture [...or honest information apparently] I tell them to simple visit a park [...] or buy a bird feeder or go for a mountain bike ride or sit in silence in a field [...] when they say they feel better, mission accomplished [yeah, that's what that premise is -- not!]."

Note: I actually can't recall recently hearing such a blatantly opaque misrepresentation. Notice how NDNR, along with Oz, does not accurately contextualize HPN, either. The actual premise of HPN will be accurately contextualized in 002. WITH BASTYR'S OWN WORDS.

001.a3. "[Dr. Oz] the first thing I want to do is thank all the naturopathic doctors for their contribution to Western medicine. The West has a long way to go [really!...] institutions like Bastyr are spectacular in presenting knowledge and research in a way that traditional medicine understands [really!...] to promote understanding [...later Oz says] what I know about natural medicine I learned from Lisa [his wife].'"

001.a4. "[Bastyr's President Church (the irony is glorious!), this] person's profession[al] or personal life exemplifies the values and supports the mission of the university [...] honoring them also honors Bastyr University [...and Oz] believed that Bastyr University [...] had done more to elevate and make credible the practice of naturopathic medicine [...] than any other single entity has he was aware of."

Note: by the way, Bastyr hosts an announcement about the awarding here. And here is Church FALSELY stating that naturopathy is science-based, in "Bastyr University - Message from the President" [vsc 2010-08-13]: 

"Bastyr University continues to champion science-based natural medicine."

001.a5. "[Oz and Bastyr seek to] bring together Western and Eastern, allopathic and naturopathic."

001.b. This is some amazing and absurd bullshit. Modern medicine is falsely labeled allopathy and Western a few times.   

Here are some of my thoughts regarding the above excerpts:

per 001.a1. Columbia University is a rather august institution; Bastyr, less so.  Obviously, Oz is happy with this honor and quite supportive of BU and what they do and Bastyr is similarly happy with this arrangement.  The question: is this progressive or regressive?  My expertise informs me that it is the latter: when thinking occurs that results in something being equated with what it is not, we're back in a kind of thinking that is earlier than juvenile.   And professional?  I don't think DECEPTION is professional [more below].

per 001.a2. Ah, those six principles [that's NCNM's non-edited version!].  Well, I'll discuss what HPN really is below.  Needless to say, what Oz describes here as HPN is completely NOT what HPN actually is.  He offers nature-appreciation / aesthetics as HPN's context, but that is is so incomplete that it is hugely wrong.

per 001.a3. I don't think modern medicine is Western or allopathic.  It's simply scientifically-centered and -minded, as opposed to prescientific superstition-centered Eastern and sectarian pseudomedical belief systems.  Our supposed West, in reverting to such archaic junk, couldn't benefit: e.g., how would chemistry benefit by reverting to concepts from alchemy, astronomy benefit from reverting to such from astrology, geography benefit from reverting to a flat-earth theory, biology benefit from reverting to Lamarkism or vitalism, and most important here, how would science benefit from reverting to a way of thinking [I'm being generous here] that doesn't care for the presence or quality of evidence when judging a claim?

Let's make it a little more personal for Dr. Oz, to emphasize his hypocrisy: how would Dr. Oz's cardiothoracic practice benefit by reverting to surgical techniques from 1880?

So, does Bastyr promote knowledge?  They don't even clearly or honestly contextualize their own principle's page HPN premise.  That's manipulative propaganda: it's as cultic as the Scientologists getting you in their church [ah-ha-ha-ha, my irony muscle is strong today] by labeling their religious practices 'a personality test'. 

And honestly, if all Dr. Oz knows about this area is from his wife, does he know much at all? Is that something to brag about?  All I know about naturopathy is from studying it for 15 years and having gone to UB's CNM for four years.  Has he read the Textbook of Natural Medicine?  You can read about naturopathy's hugely science-ejected HPN vitalistic premise there, quite easily.

per 001.a4. The essentially naturopathic is not credible, unless non-disclosure is now ethically equivalent to professions-endorsed informed-decision-making, and science and nonscience are now the same thing.  This seems to be quite a dunderheaded, mutual admiration circle-jerk.

per 001.a5.  The blending of prescientific knowledge / beliefs and modern, scientifically-derived knowledge and then it all being falsely labeled science is naturopathy's MO.  After all, it is Bastyr especially that trades on this insane expression [from their home page]:

"a multidisciplinary curriculum in science-based natural medicine [...] Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature [vitalism]."

But, the science-based excludes supernaturalism and vitalism [and physiological teleology, that 'intelligent' aspect of HPN]. That's a basic fact. So, in blending science and nonscience and calling the whole thing science -- yes, for Oz and Bastyr, mission accomplished.  This phenomenon is what I've labeled "epistemic conflation" [EC]-- it's analogous to the label pseudoscience.  But whereas pseudoscience is a question of 'science or not', epistemic conflation looks at the entire spectrum of knowledge-type [e.g., from the a priori to the a posteriori].  Here's how illegitimate this EC is: it would be hugely ground-breaking in terms of modern thought if it was progressive, applicable, useful, rational, productive, world-changing; the Nobel Committee would have awarded their prizes already for this huge sea-change in epistemology.  Instead: silence from Stockholm.  And judgments of irrationality, ignorance, and insanity from many observing from the wings.

001.c. Bastyr has video up of the ceremony:

him, her [vsc 2010-08-13].

002. what HPN actually is FOR NATUROPATHY [not what Dr. O. said, at all]:

002.a. how Bastyr represents HPN, and then digging a little deeper for full-disclosure / transparency / honesty [pseudoscience!]:

002.a1. Bastyr misrepresents HPN as:

""the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae): naturopathic medicine recognizes the body's inherent ability, which is ordered and intelligent, to heal itself. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery, and to facilitate and augment this healing ability."

Note: and that's all you get there.

002.a2. now, here's a 2001 internal Bastyr document that clearly states that HPN is a "vital force,"  and this figmentation is QUITE different from what Oz and Bastyr [from directly above] describe HPN as:

"NM5136 - The Vis Medicatrix Naturae [...] naturopathic medicine’s core clinical principle, the vis medicatrix naturae, is shared by traditional systems of medicine throughout the world. This course explores clinical research, writings and techniques from various systems of medicine which incorporate nature’s influence on healing, the nature of the healing processes, and the vital or life force."

002.b. NDNR, at times, has been transparent [but not in this Oz article] about that central naturopathic HPN premise.  Here's ND Cage vitalizing in “Tolle Causam - Abnormal Cell Growth in Light of Naturopathic Philosophy” [Cage, A. (ND SCNM); NDNR - Feb. 2006, vol. 02 issue 02]:

“this concept of the energetic anatomical structures and the energy conducted by them is entirely harmonious with a third naturopathic principle – the vis medicatrix naturae – the healing power of nature, often referred to as the vital force […] vitalism […] the term vital force appears to be the European translation of qi or prana […] qi, prana, and the vital force […] qi  / energy [p.007].”

002.c. what science says about HPN [vitalism]:

it's not science-based, it is science-ejected.

002.d. What Bastyr falsely labels naturopathy / vitalism, still, to this day:

science-based.

003. So, overall, huge absurdity -- still. 

Is it honorable and professional to promote the absurd, and in the process annul national medical, academic and particularly science standards [and sanity] with sectarian nonsense and sectarian irrationality?  No, because it is a misrepresentation.

Thankfully that mission is unaccomplished.  But, these knowledge conflationists seem to be working really hard toward that mission [vsc 2010-08-13] and engaging in commerce under HUGELY FALSE labels [unfair business practice].

------------------------------------------------------------

2011-10-09 appendage [too good to contain!]:

So, I'd mentioned "Dr. Mehmet Oz's apparent ignorance of naturopathy's 'healing power of nature' [HPN] primary principle" above, but isn't this interesting...

Though what I've shared above doesn't seem to indicate that Dr. Oz understands HPN-VMN in any significant manner [a falsely labeled as science actually science-ejected archaic sectarian article of faith that is physiological nonsense], while he claims "to understand and embrace these principles", there is a source I recommend for a transparent explanation of naturopathy's basic context which overarches ALL THEIR PRINCIPLES [the one ring to rule them all!]:

[my scan of the book's cover]

This is Blackwell's Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Fast Facts for Medical Practice [editors Herring, M.A. (BSN IWU, MSN UH), Roberts, M.M. (MD UA)](2002; ISBN 0632045833 978-0632045839; strangely-quite-wrongly published under the "Blackwell Science" imprint) [I own this book, ocr'd 2011-10].

The book's cover states "experts in their respective fields provide current and objective information" so the physician -- yes, this is written for physicians -- "can educate yourself and your patients [...and] be ready [...] to address patient questions."

Specific to naturopathy, in his ch. 14, then Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences faculty member Ehrlich, S.D. (NMD SCNM) writes:

"naturopathy is a distinct system of medicine that is based on an understanding that the human organism contains a powerful healing intelligence called the 'vital force.' Naturopathic physicians, as licensed practitioners are referred to in most states, support the vital force by following the six principles of naturopathic medicine:  1. support the healing power of nature [etc....] naturopathy is unique in that it is defined by its principles rather than its modalities. A variety of interventions are used to help mobilize the vital force in patients to bring about cure [...including] nutrition, botanical medicine, homeopathy, mind-body medicine, physical medicine, and lifestyle counseling [...and] the Eastern modalities of acupuncture and ayurveda [...] as these schools of medicine complement the vitalistic medical philosophy of naturopathy [p.091...] the symptom is merely an expression of imbalance by the vital force, which hints of underlying patterns of disharmony [...] by treating the cause, symptoms are alleviated naturally and permanently, the vital force no longer needing to express a condition of imbalance [p.092...] naturopathy has continued to evolve and integrate more conventional Western medical science with its vitalistic teachings to become the modern system of naturopathic medicine that exists today [...] fast facts for medical practice: naturopaths treat the whole person, using the healing power of nature to enliven a patient's own 'vital force' or innate healing ability [p.095]."

So, everything about naturopathy is couched in vitalism -- that hugely science-ejected archaism [Southwest too loves to claim such survives scientific scrutiny!].  But, that's not what's most interesting about this book.  Get this:

Dr. Oz wrote its Foreword!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  He seems to have forgotten its contents with respect to naturopathy.  Oz writes [my comments are in bold]:

"the information gap between patients and the modern medical practitioner continues to grow [...] we have a communication gap [...]";

Well, Dr. Oz really hasn't helped us understand naturopathy via NDNR, TRANSPARENTLY, so he's in my opinion on the wrong side as regards being informative!

"this book helps to provide a substantive foundation that physicians can bring to their discussions with patients to reestablish the precious covenant that they expect [...by way of] aggressive pursuit of the newest knowledge [...] I am optimistic that this book will facilitate this process [...]";

The irony is killing me: COULDN'T Dr. Oz have turned to ch. 14 and then explained during the NDNR interview ACTUAL NATUROPATHY and not employed 'a naturopathy as nature appreciation' ruse?  Furthermore, what are the ethics of all this?  Bastyr who-gave-him-the-degree falsely labels the naturopathic endeavor "science-based"; Dr. Oz should know better but I guess this doesn't bother him.

It's signed: "Mehmet Oz, M.D. Director of Cardiovascular Institute Associate Professor of Surgery Department of Surgery College of Physicians and Surgeons Columbia University New York, New York."

And, shamefully -- and obviously with Dr. Oz's participation, merely in the book's first chapter alone -- the misconstruction / false-labeling of modern medicine as "allopathy" or "allopathic" occurs...wait for it...

26 times. Yes, the homeopathic term "allopathy" is falsely placed upon modern medicine twenty-six times in the first chapter alone.

Also [interesting for me in that homeopathy is as committed to vitalism as naturopathy is, and naturopathy is quite committed to homeopathy, even to the extent that homeopathy is falsely labeled "science" on the North American ND / NMD licensure exam and is REQUIRED for the degree and licensure], the homeopathy chapter states:

"in homeopathic theory, symptoms are produced when the vital force, the energy maintaining life in the individual, is out of balance [p.062]."

Naturopathy as Portrayed in the Yakima Herald-Republic: Incomplete, Misleading (What's New)

here, I cite from from an article in Washington State's Yakima Herald-Republic concerning naturopathy, and I respond to some of it [see 001., below]; then, I quote from some of ND Robel's own web pages [see 002., below]:

001. Emily Gwinn reports in "Naturopathic Medicine is on the Rise in the Yakima Valley" (2010-07-15)[vsc 2010-08-08]:

001.a. "[ND] Heidi Robel [...says] the essential difference between her medical practice and others [is] 'education, education, education [...] we teach people to make educated choices about their health [...] we're just like other family doctors' [...] Robel [...] grew up in Yakima and decided to return here after medical school."

Note: I believe here that naturopathy is being confused with and falsely portrayed as modern 'medicine'. And as regards education: being that naturopaths are hugely miseducated to spread the huge falsehood that that which is science-ejected is able to survive scientific scrutiny, I'd run away from any 'naturopath trying to educate me.'  When science is the same as nonscience, the clowns are leading the band and the inmates are running the asylum.

001.b. "naturopathic medicine is based on the belief that the human body has an innate healing ability, and naturopathic doctors teach their patients to use diet, exercise, lifestyle changes and natural therapies to enhance their bodies' ability to ward off disease [coded vitalism...] naturopathic medicine is a system of health care described by the Washington Association of Naturopathic Physicians as an art, science, philosophy and practice of diagnosis, treatment and prevention of illness."

Note: the actual belief that naturopathy is centered upon is called, though this article fails to mention it, vitalism. The NCNM link above transparently describes that, though it also falsely states that such survives scientific scrutiny.  The WANP also FAILS to transparently describe naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalism on their own page defining naturopathy.  This is why I term naturopathy an 'unethical sectarian pseudoscience.'  You don't get the absurd truth that is naturopathy -- wherein the hugely exterior to science is falsely labeled science -- not from naturopathy or from reporters writing about naturopathy.

001.c. "medical doctors and doctors of osteopathic medicine also use alternative medicines, but only when they've been proven to be responsive through clinical studies that follow the scientific method [...] 'there are many ways of finding truth,' said Dr. Deb Harper, President of the Washington State Medical Association. 'I am going to dedicate myself to what is scientifically true' [...] 'it's dangerous to use art alone without science,' she said."

Note: Harper is quite on point.  No matter how much 'care' is involved in terms of naturopathy, if basic premises are false -- e.g., there's a vital force that is a scientifically supported, objective fact -- the outcomes don't stand much of a chance of being true.

001.d. "naturopathic medical colleges are four-year graduate schools with the doctor of naturopathic medicine degree awarded after classroom, clinic and practical study. In Washington, Bastyr University in the Seattle suburb of Kenmore offers naturopathic medical education and training."

Note: Bastyr is a great example of what I term 'naturopathy's epistemic conflation' and  'knowledge type mislabeling.'  BU claims that within science is the science-ejected vitalistic and supernatural (e.g., "the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating [blending] mind, body, spirit [supernaturalism] and nature [vitalism]") and then, obviously, after blending all kinds of knowledge claims, trading on this muddle with a false label that this all is a certain singular type of knowledge (e.g., "science").  This type of thinking doesn't pass freshman undergraduate ANYTHING class, never mind 'graduate medical'-level strictures.

002. ND Robel's web pages state in:

002.a. "Meet The Dr." [vsc 2010-08-08]:

"Dr. Robel [...is] highly trained in Western science and alternative medicine and thus uniquely qualified to determine what is best for her patients [...] Dr. Robel earned a Doctorate in Naturopathic Medicine and a Masters in Acupuncture from Bastyr University, the leading medical institution in science-based natural medicine. She also holds a Bachelors of Science in Neurobiology from the University of Washington."

Note: science, science, science!

002.b. "What’s the Difference Between Medical Degrees?" (a 2008-05-28 linked article written by Sara Bristol) [vsc 2010-08-08]:

"naturopaths have had four years of graduate education, and are educated in all of the basic sciences like D.O.s and M.D.s [...] N.D.s are highly trained in Western science."

Note: science, science, science!

003. boy these ND's really don't want to reveal their nonscientific actuality.  In fact, they claim to be science-experts.  It's quite a ruse.  But, if you look hard enough, you can get to the sectarian center that lies beneath all the opacity and camouflage that is usually presented to the public:

For instance, here's Bastyr University, Robel's alma mater, explicitly stating naturopathy's essential nonscientific vitalistic core belief in "Bastyr University Catalog 2002-2003":

"NM5131 Naturopathic Clinical Theory 1 [...] the vitalistic context of science-based,
modern naturopathic medicine is emphasized [...] NM5136 The Vis Medicatrix Naturae [...]  this course explores clinical research, writings and techniques from various systems of medicine which incorporate nature’s influence on healing, the nature of the healing
processes, and the vital or life force [p.097...] NM9118 Energetics of Natural Medicine [...] this course presents an analysis of the vital force [p.101]."

Note: truly absurd.

The Coded Vitalism of Bastyr University Naturopathy 2010

001. BU states in "Academic Degree Programs: Principles of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-08-06]:

"[#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae): naturopathic medicine recognizes the body's inherent ability, which is ordered and intelligent, to heal itself. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery, and to facilitate and augment this healing ability."

Note: nowhere on this page is their the term "life force", "vital force" or "vitalistic".  There is supernaturalism, though [which is science-exterior]: "[#5] total health also includes spiritual health, naturopathic physicians encourage individuals to pursue their personal spiritual path."

002. even now, I say wow.  Wow.  What they aren't telling us about! Their mother-ship school, so to speak, NCNM, is useful to decode what Bastyr has coded.  This is how naturopathy gets the hook set: opaque language and falsely labeling that coded stuff which is science-exterior as science.  So, uninformed consent and falsehood.

Science Rejects Supernaturalism and Vitalism - Hall's 2010 ISBN 0763760390

here, I cite from an undergraduate science survey text centered on evolutionary science.  Note how, even within the undergraduate, nonscience major context, concepts such as supernaturalism and vitalism are overtly stated as nonscientific [see 001., below]; then I point out the anomaly of naturopathy, which at the doctoral level makes the absurd claim that those two concepts are indeed within science [see 002., below]:

001. Hall, B.K. (PhD{zoology} UNE, DSc{biological sciences} UNE) writes in "Evolution: Principles and Processes" (0763760390;2010) [the book is viewable at Amazon.com, in part]: 

"[this book is] written for students without a scientific background taking a one-term course [...and it] begins with a introduction to the nature of science [{on back cover}...regarding] vital force [or] vitalism [...] gaining freedom from such [religious-like, vacuous!] constraints was more difficult for biology (especially for evolution) than it was for physics or chemistry [p.433...] vitalism: the concept that the activities of living organisms cannot be explained by any underlying physical or chemical principles but arise from unknowable internal or supernatural causes [p.g21...] Darwin's works made clear that society no longer needed to believe that only the actions of a supernatural creator could explain biological relationships [p.435...] despite the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution as a natural process, some religous groups adhering to creation[ism] have developed intelligent design as a purported scientific alternative to evolution.  'Intelligent design' is latter-day creationism [...but] Kitzmiller v. Dover [..ruled it] a form of religion and not science [...] because intelligent design relies on supernatural explanations rather than natural causes, it is not science [...] religious arguments [...] are not scientific explanations and should not be confused with, or regarded as, scientific explanations [p.440]."

Note: science does not, obviously, include supernaturalism and vitalism.  Dr. Hall has both a doctorate in zoology, and in biological sciences.  This is a mainstream undergraduate biology textbook that, I think, speaks well for the preponderance of science regarding these two issues.  Vitalism, historically, impeded research, thus the language of "gaining freedom from such constraints."  It was regarded as a place-filler that diverted scientists from the gaining of actual knowledge, much as the "god did it" supernatural place-filler explained nothing -- essentially.

.
002. now, for the naturopathic.  Two versions come to mind that disqualify the naturopathic context or worldview as scientific.  There is the 'simple' Bastyr statement [see 002.a., below] and the 'more fractured' University of Bridgeport statement collection [see 002.b., below]:

002.a. Bastyr University, which has a naturopathic program that claims a "robust basic sciences curriculum" states, in their U.S. News and World Report [false] advertisement "Bastyr University" [vsc 2010-06-29]:

"Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature."

Note: the "nature" of course is naturopathy's central vitalistic context, the healing power of nature.  So, there you go, the supernatural and vitalistic falsely claimed to be within science.  Facts speak otherwise.  Integrating of course means to blend.  I have called such knowledge-type blending "epistemic conflation" [EC].  Science, truly, is not a conflation of knowledge types, but an "epistemic delineation."

002.b. the University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine does the same type of EC, except it is spread across more than one web page:

002.b1. UB states vitalism and supernaturalism in 5 of their 6 defining naturopathic principles / strictures [vsc 2010-06-29]:

"Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #1, the Healing Power of Nature, Viz Medicatrix Naturae [...] the healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force [vitalism]. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process ['the vitalistic context!'...] Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #2, Identify and Treat the Cause, Viz Tolle Causam" [...] causes may occur on many levels including physical, mental, emotional and spiritual [supernaturalism...] in "Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #3, First Do No Harm, Viz Primum no Nocere" [...] illiness [sp., illness!] is a purposeful [that is, teleological, which is also science-ejected] process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact, an expression of the life force [vitalism, claimed as fact!] attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complimentary to and synergistic with this healing process ['this vitalistic context']. The physician's actions can support or antagonize the actions of he [sp., 'the!'] viz medicatrix naturae [...] Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #4, Treat the Whole Person, The Multifactorial Nature of Health and Disease" [I guess they couldn't swing the Latin on that one, and considering the likelihood that their 'viz' is supposed to be 'vis', we're grateful] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism,a whole involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual, mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, social, and other factors. The physician must treat the whole person by taking all of these factors into account [...]  Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #4,The Physician as Teacher, Viz Docere [...] the physician must also make a commitment to his/her personal and spiritual development in order to be a good teacher."

Note: so, they can't spell or proofread well and their Latin sucks.  So, five out of the six UB naturopathic strictures involve vitalism or supernaturalism [or teleology!].  Then, it is all labeled "science" [vsc 2010-06-29].  Again, EC.

003. fascinating.  Commerce, here in the academic area and then into the clinical area, occurring under OBVIOUSLY false labels. 

Note: now, an ND is obligated to this false position, by OATH.  Here is that oath [vsc 2010-06-29] by a Canadian CAND-AANP-AANMC type ND:

"I dedicate myself to the service of humanity as a practitioner of the art and science of naturopathic medicine [...] I will honor the principles of naturopathic medicine: first, to do no harm; to cooperate with the healing powers of nature [vitalism!]; to address the fundamental causes of disease; to heal the whole person [supernaturalism!] through individualised treatment; to teach the principles of healthy living and preventive medicine. With my whole heart, before these witnesses, as a doctor of naturopathic medicine, I pledge to remain true to this oath."

Note: the label of "science" upon principles, which, when looked at in detail, are science-ejected.

The big INTERNATIONAL logical inconsistency and ethical absurdity, of course is:

I pledge to remain true to this falsehood, for the benefit of society!  In actuality, society is being deceived, and science, modern doctoral education, and plain old common sense are being defecated upon.

Peterson's Bastyr U. ND Program Profile: The Label of Profession and Science, The Reality of Nonprofessionality and Nonscience

here, I cite from Peterson's "Graduate Programs in Business, Education, Health, Information Studies, Law and Social Work 2004" (ISBN 076891146x) [below, I will simply call this source "Peterson's"] which falsely labels naturopathy 'professions-level science' [see 001., below]; then, I use my alma mater's own web page to show naturopathy's underlying essential nonscience context [see 002., below]:

001. Peterson's states in "Bastyr University School Of Naturopathic Medicine" [you can search much of it at books.google.com]:

001.a. per "profess":

"Bastyr University offers a four-year program of professional education leading to the Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine N.D. degree. The naturopathic medical profession [etc. p.2107]."

Note: professional, professional, professional.  Supposedly.

001.b. per "scien":

"the goal of the program is to educate future physicians in the tradition of medical science and the art of natural healing […by] providing a comprehensive understanding of the basic medical sciences […] students receive a thorough foundation in the basic medical sciences […] the University’s mission includes the pursuit of scientific research […] Bastyr University was founded as a naturopathic medical college in 1978 to meet the growing need for scientifically trained naturopathic physicians […via a] comprehensive education in the natural health sciences [p.2107]."

Note: science, science, science.  Supposedly.

002. underneath these labels, you can see what the actual context of naturopathy is:

the science-ejected vitalistic.

Note: nonscience, at its core.  Truly. By oath, though often the context is coded in naturalistic language. While only one large aspect of the naturopathic belief amalgam, vitalism is thoroughly science-ejected.  

So WOW!  A book that declares itself "the authority" is full of false nonsense.  It is likely that MANY people were induced by Peterson's and Bastyr into studying naturopathy through false labelings.  Seems to me that the pages of this book should be regarded as false-advertisement space.  Unfortunately for the unknowing trusting public, e.g. the Bastyr entry, naturopathic commerce is unfair.

003. the professions:

adhere to the highest of ethical standards, credat emptor [let the buyer have faith].  But, obviously, naturopathy is so academically and institutionally science-illiterate, incompetent and unethical / false / lacking in integrity and rationality that the buyer shouldn't have any faith / trust in naturopathy at all.  The buyer should run, instead: be that buyer a clinical patient or an academic customer. 

Naturopathy cannot meet the laxer standard of caveat emptor [let the buyer beware].  Used car dealers are held to higher standards than naturopathy, which is allowed to basically be legalized robbery.

 

This misreference book has a prized place on my bookshelf.

A Search Sample of Naturopathic Contextual Coding and Mislabeling via 'accessmylibary.com', 2009:

here, I do an experiment of sorts and search the Gale database 'accessmylibrary.com' with the search parameter >naturopathic medicatrix<. I got 11 hits, 9 of which were useful. What I am most interested in here is whether the actual vitalistic premise [a.k.a. VMN] of naturopathy is communicated clearly to the reader, i.e. whether that premise is honestly explained as a hugely nonscientific sectarian belief, or instead, naturopathy miscommunicates and misleads [take a guess, most of the time, what happens!]:

001. so, this is them:

001.a. "Epistemology of Naturopathic Medicine [...]", from the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients [TLDP] 2005, by then NCNM student Krebs, R.M. (ND NCNM 2005) which states:

"[naturopathy's] six philosophical tenets [were] developed with the 1985 formation of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians: 1. vis medicatrix naturae [VMN] (the healing power of nature)."

Note: there is no clear communication of naturopathy's essential vitalism.  There is no clear communication of vitalism's science-ejected status.

001.b. "Naturopathic Medicine: What Can Patients Expect? [...]", from the Journal of Family Practice 2005, by NDs Dunne (ND NCNM 1989), Kim (ND ?), Mittman (ND NCNM 1985), Barrett (ND NCNM 1986), Snider (ND Bastyr 1982), and Pizzorno (ND NCNM 1975), which states:

"[there are supposedly!!!] inherent organizing forces underlying known physiologic processes [...] naturopathic medicine calls this primary principle the vis medicatrix naturae, or the healing power of nature [...] the goal of naturopathic medical education is to prepare clinicians for the challenges of general practice with a foundation in current medical science."

Note: again, VMN's context is not transparently communicated, while science, particularly medical science, is claimed as a foundation of the naturopathic.

001.c. "Naturopathic Medicine", from American Fitness 2004, by ND Wotton, B. (ND Bastyr 1995), which states:

"treatment plans recommended by NDs are based on the six guiding principles of naturopathic philosophy: [#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae). NDs support the inherent healing wisdom of the body to promote, maintain or restore normal function [...] naturopathic doctors complete a four-year, graduate-level, accredited naturopathic medicine program to receive a doctorate of naturopathy (N.D.) [...] this program is similar to conventional medical education, with the first two years concentrating on medical sciences."

Note: again, VMN is not contextually explained and medical science expertise is claimed.

001.d. "Naturopathic Medicine, Integrative Medicine and Women's Health", from TLDP 2001, by ND Hudson, T. (ND NCNM 1984), which states:

"[there are] seven principles are the foundation for Naturopathic medicine: 1. the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae).  The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain and restore health [...] natural medicine has also matured, particularly in the areas of scientific research, educational institutions, virtual numbers of licensed practitioners, and professionalism, and is now poised to serve those who seek its gentle ways [...it is a] vitalistic holistic healing art [...based on] our vitalistic philosophy."

Note: now, we get some transparency, but I completely disagree with the label "profession" and "science" upon the essentially naturopathic.

001.e. "Healing Communities", from Alternatives Journal 2005, by ND Meyer, M. (ND ?), which states:

"naturopathic medicine bases itself on the principle vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature [...and later mentions] the vital force [VF]."

Note: but, there is no mention of where VMN/VF stands in relation to science.

001.f. "Naturopathy: Prevention Before Cure [...]", from Natural Life 1997, by Gervais, R. (ND Bastyr 1993), which states:

"vis medicatrix naturae -- the healing power of nature. Fundamental to the practice of naturopathic medicine is a profound belief in the ability of the body to heal itself, given the proper opportunity [...] vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature, to denote the body's ability to heal itself  [...] the first two years concentrate on the standard human biological sciences [...] the second two years are oriented towards the clinical sciences [...] the therapeutic sciences."

Note: again, no explanation of VMN as being essentially science-ejected.

001.g. "William (Bill) Mitchell, Jr. ND [ND NCNM] (in memoriam)", from TLDP 2007, by ND Reichenberg-Ullman, J. (ND Bastyr 1983), which states:

"Bill had an unfailing belief and confidence in the power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature)."

Note: ditto.

001.h. "Botanical Solutions [...]", from TLDP 2002, by Walker, M. (? ?), which states:

"the human body holds a restorative capacity, the vis medicatrix naturae."

Note: ditto.

001.i. "Whole Foods [...]", from TLDP 2003, by NDs Meletis (ND ?) and Barker (ND SCNM), which states:

"our understanding of vis medicatrix naturae [...] Dr. Meletis [...] sits on scientific advisory boards."

Note: ditto.

002. I'm not surprised.  Generally, science is claimed by naturopathy and their nonscientific vitalistic premise isn't transparently communicated -- lets call this misinformed consent.  And lets call all this SLIMY.

Note: a lot of the NDs listed above are NCNM or Bastyr grads.  You can go to NCNM's web page where they explicitly state the essential vitalism [and supernaturalism] of naturopathy and tell us all that such survives scientific scrutiny, which is false.  You can go to Bastyr's page where they state that naturopathy is "science based natural medicine", which, again, is false.