CAND's New PR Push: ExploreYourHealth.ca

here, I cite from a Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctor's [CAND] recent press release about naturopathy's ExploreYourHealth.ca / Canadian Naturopathic Foundation [see 001., below]; then directly from that CNF site which claims naturopathy is scientific and highly efficacious [see 002., below]; and finally, from CAND's Youtube channel which claims naturopathy is science yet simultaneously is premised on the science-ejected [see 003., below]:

001. marketwire.com states in "The Canadian Naturopathic Foundation [2011-03-23]" [vsc 2011-03-23]:

"Toronto, Ontario [2011-03-23...] the Canadian Naturopathic Foundation (CNF) [more on them below...] a registered charitable organization (B/N118834712RR0001) that supports research and public education for the advancement of naturopathic medicine in Canada [...] is pleased to announce the launch of ExploreYourHealth.ca – Canada's only one-stop online source for naturopathic health information and guidance approved by the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors (CAND) [...]  the national voice of the Canadian naturopathic profession since 1955 [...] CAND membership consists of over 1,900 Canadian naturopathic doctors and naturopathic medical students [...who] undergo training similar to medical doctors [...that] includes basic sciences, clinical sciences, naturopathic disciplines, and clinical experience [...ExploreYourHealth.ca  was] created to provide a reliable and trustworthy resource about the many benefits naturopathic medicine offers in achieving good health, preventing illness and treating disease [...] Dr. Jason Boxtart, ND, Chair of the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors, expressed his strong support for ExploreYourHealth.ca and the Canadian Naturopathic Foundation [...] 'with so much confusing information out there on natural and complementary approaches to health and medicine, we saw a strong need for a resource that was trustworthy and based on the knowledge of educated and accredited professionals' [...] the site's Ask an ND section allows visitors to submit specific questions to naturopathic doctors. Selected questions are then answered through a brief video segment like the one included in this release. Visitors requiring more in depth information and advice can use the Find an ND resource tool to find a naturopathic doctor in their area [...] naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends modern scientific knowledge with traditional and natural forms of medicine [...] for more information, please contact Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors: Shawn O'Reilly Executive Director, 416 496-8633, soreilly@cand.ca [...] editor's note: there is a video included with this release [see note below]."

Note: CAND says the new site is reliable.  Well, it's good that CAND -- professionally [wink-wink] -- approves, really.   But is CAND reliable to begin with?  Or nonsensical?  What are CAND standards? Oh, yes, naturopaths love to educate, in that narrow kind of manner that is known as indoctrination and opacity.  "The knowledge of educated and accredited professionals" -- ah, that complete reversal of values regarding knowledge and professionalism!  You could encapsulate naturopathy illogic in many ways, and "distinct primary health care system that blends" is one of my favorites: the delineated-conflated.  My irony meter is exploding.

Yes, there is an embedded / linked video, "Training and Education of a Naturopathic Doctor -- 'What's Up Doc?'" [vsc 2011-02-15] featuring Canada's ND Dempster who states:

"my name is Dr. John Dempster and I'm a licensed naturopathic doctor in Toronto, Ontario [...] what type of education goes into becoming a naturopathic doctor? [...] students enter into an undergraduate degree that is heavily weighted in medical sciences [...then go to a] naturopathic institution [...then take] a rigorous set of board exams [...so] visit www.cand.ca."

Those board exams are actually so rigorous that homeopathy is labeled a "clinical science" on them -- while profoundly considered science-ejected whackoness, truly.  Labeling homeopathy science is as scientifically rigorous as labeling flat-Earth-ism geography.  Sure, they require sciences to get into ND school but not the "medical sciences" that ND Dempster says.  What's needed specifically are prerequisites in the pre-medical sciences sense, duh!  Yet, requiring science as an entrance requirement doesn't make the naturopathic context science! Just like throwing some wine into a whole lot of mud doesn't magically make the whole thing wine.  Furthermore, even if naturopaths later in ND school study a huge amount of medical science, what's overlain / oathed-to truly, is a sectarian ideology / belief system as a required context / naturopathic standard of care that science IN FACT hugely rejects / does not support.  But, anyway...

002. CNF and ExploreYourHealth.ca:

002.a. CNF states:

a Google.com web search led to a CAND page that states: "Canadian Naturopathic Foundation (CNF): please visit ExploreYourHealth.ca for information on the Canadian Naturopathic Foundation".

Note: so we go there.

002.b. ExploreYourHealth.ca states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-25; my comments are in bold]:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends modern scientific knowledge with traditional and natural forms of medicine [...it's] a truly integrative form of health care [...]";

Again, that great oxymorony of 'the blended distinct'.  Illogic is not a virtue, until you cross the border into naturopathyland.

"naturopathic medicine is the art and science of disease diagnosis, treatment and prevention using natural therapies including botanical medicine, clinical nutrition, hydrotherapy, homeopathy, naturopathic manipulation, traditional Chinese medicine / acupuncture, and lifestyle counseling [...these] safe and effective ways to restore health [...it's] very effective in improving quality of life for those with serious and life threatening illnesses [...] patients with chronic illness have found tremendous benefits [...]";

And here we go with the nonsense of a science label upon such bullshit therapeutics as homeopathy and TCM.  Those are some scary-ass efficacy claims on what is truly parlor pseudomedicine: e.g., even today at Science-Based Medicine, Brennen McKenzie writes in "How Popular is Acupuncture?" "a large majority of people who seek acupuncture therapy, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, do so for treatment of musculoskeletal conditions and pain. There is good evidence that the therapeutic ritual of acupuncture has some symptomatic benefit for such indications. This is almost certainly a non-specific treatment effect (aka 'placebo'). It does not seem to matter where needles are inserted or if they are inserted at all, and acupuncture therapy does not appear to measurably affect the course of any actual disease. (The Skeptic’s Dictionary has a clear and concise review)".

"a naturopathic doctor is a primary care practitioner that seeks to restore and maintain optimum health in their patients by emphasizing nature’s inherent self-healing process [...] the naturopathic philosophy is to stimulate the healing power of the body and to treat the root cause of disease [...]";

Coded vitalism.  What kind of profession codes its context and engages in commerce based on such opacity?  What kind of supposed science is, ultimately, founded on science-ejected ideas? This CNF 'naturopathy principles page' also hugely codes naturopathy's HPN-VMN premise.  And so does this one and this one.

"a naturopathic doctor views the individual as an integral whole including the physiological, structural, psychological, social, spiritual, environment and lifestyle factors affecting health [...]";

And presto, supernaturalism / spiritism is now within the category of science by naturopathic word magic.  Hand out the Nobels.

"naturopathic medicine emphasizes disease as a process rather than disease as an entity [...]";

This is a strawman, of sorts.  Pathophysiology is the study of disease processes in medical science.  Medical science does not believe disease is an entity either.  Isn't it ironic that it is naturopathy that conceives 'life' as a dualistic 'intelligent spirit force / energy' entity / geist but reversely accuses modern medicine of holding such a view.

"naturopathic doctors [...] cooperate with other branches of medical science [...]";

Wow, that HUGE science claim upon the naturopathic enterprise.

"in Canada, the naturopathic medical profession’s infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing, national standards of practice, participation in  federal health care initiatives, and a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...]";

Ah, profession and science claims.  I'm not sure how standards of practice can exist if, in terms of knowledge, 'anything goes'.

"it is the approach, philosophy and training of naturopathic doctors that sets it apart from other forms of health care [...] a new perspective [...]";

I'll say.  Apart in the padded room kind of way.

"naturopathic medical care [...involves] a clear understanding of the factors that affect health and how to deal with them on a daily basis [...a] broad understanding of health and the relationship between health, life and the environment";

So, in all this muddle they claim that their understanding is clear.  They claim a broadness of knowledge.  I disagree.  I see muddle and quite undeveloped thinking.

003. CAND's overall false claim that naturopathy is science-based [because within that claim is the science-ejected]:

003.a. CAND on Youtube:

that ND Dempster supposed science-context reference reminded me that that CAND's Youtube channel has had up quite a strong 'naturopathic is science-based' claim for some time, three years now and counting [see these two Youtube videos, here and here; both vsc 2011-03-23].

Those two CAND videos describe naturopathy as "science-based natural medicine".

003.b. but, according to CAND's own publication "The History of Naturopathic Medicine: A Canadian Perspective" (ISBN 1552787788, 2009) [I own multiple copies], naturopathy is based on the science-ejected, essentially:

"[amongst many references to naturopathy's defining vitalism] the aim of naturopathic physicians is to treat the patient, not the disease, by directing the vital force and encouraging it with naturopathic therapeutics to stimulate the body’s own defenses [p.031]."

Note: also, CNF states in "Natural Therapies Used by NDs" [vsc 2011-03-25]:

"homeopathic medicine: this powerful system of medicine [...] homeopathic remedies[...] when carefully matched to the patient they are able to affect the body’s 'vital force' and to stimulate the body’s innate healing forces."

004. overall note:

have you ever read and heard such nonsense?

The Canadian Gang of Naturopathic Four and Their Science Absurdity (c. 2008)

here, I cite from the Board of Directors of Drugless Therapy - Naturopathy [BDDT-N] which claims the science-ejected survives scientific scrutiny [see 001., below]; then, I decode that science-ejected idea [see 002., below]; and mention that it is not science [see 003., below]; then I muse [see 004., below]:

001. the BDDT-N hosts the document "Submission to: Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council"(2008-11-12) [vsc 2011-02-18] which states [I'm not sure this document is permanently archived by the provincial government, but that is likely]:

"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 [...including principle #2] recognition and support of the inherent self-healing ability of the individual (the healing power of nature) [SHAI-HPN...] stimulate the self-healing mechanisms (vis medicatrix naturae) [SHM-VMN...or as #1] the healing power of nature: naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent healing process [IHP] in the person that is ordered and intelligent. The body is capable of healing itself. The role of the naturopathic doctor is to identify and remove obstacles to healing and recovery and to facilitate and augment this inherent natural tendency of the body [...] stimulate the healing power of nature with therapies like homeopathy and hydrotherapy."

Note: what's fascinating is what isn't mentioned.  Nowhere in this document do I find the terms "vital", "force", or "spirit".  But, SHAI-SHM-HNP-VMN-IHP is claimed to survive scientific scrutiny, be objective fact, and obviously is essential to 'the naturopathic'.  The document states this is a "joint submission by CCNM, BDDT-N, OAND, CAND" and in fact has the signatures of the principals of those arms of Canadanian naturopathy within it.

There are further science claims upon 'the naturopathic', including:

"NDs have training in the clinical sciences [...] the first year curriculum stresses the basic sciences [...] in second year, clinical science is stressed [...] NPLEX Part II - Core Clinical Science Competencies [...] basic science related to IV therapy [...] basic science (anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, microbiology, pathology) [...] their scientific binomial name [...] program requirements for its degree or diploma of a minimum of 4,100 total hours in basic and clinical sciences [etc....] Part I of the NPLEX, the Basic Science Examinations [...] students are encouraged to take this portion of the examination as soon as they finish their basic science coursework [...] Part II, the Core Clinical Science Examination [...] beginning with the August 2007 NPLEX Exam administration, the Part II - Core Clinical Science Series will be integrated into a single examination that will include homeopathy [...] naturopathic medicine is a [...] science [...] naturopathic physicians are primary health care practitioners, whose diverse techniques include modern and traditional, scientific and empirical methods [...] Michael Traub, ND [...] he remains a member of the AANP’s Scientific Affairs Committee."

So, science science science.  Yes, that is the claim that homeopathy specifically is a "clinical science".  Let's decode SHAI-SHM-HNP-VMN-IHP via CAND's own 2009 publication, and see what it essentially is and what science says about it.

002. CAND and Lloyd, I. (ND CCNM 2002) write in "The History of Naturopathic Medicine: A Canadian Perspective" (ISBN 9781552787786, 2009)[available at Amazon.com for $40 about]:

"vitalism and holism represents the philosophy of naturopathic medicine [p.029...#2] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [...] the aim of naturopathic physicians is to treat the patient, not the disease, by directing the vital force and encouraging it with naturopathic therapeutics to stimulate the body’s own defenses [p.031]."

Note: so, there's the vitalism / vital force / HPN-VMN that is essential to naturopathy.  Truly, when they say "treat the cause" they are talking about a vitalistic context.  Truly, whatever language they choose -- and so often they choose to disguise their context in a crafty manner -- they are in the end vitalistically of context.

003. what science says about vitalism:

science says it is not science.

004. so, regarding this Canadian Gang of Naturopathic Four:

this is truly a feat of mislabeling on a grand scale [national!].  It is typical of the naturopathic.  How a hugely science-ejected sectarian claim supposedly survives scientific scrutiny as objective fact is truly a feat of cultic proportions.  Such is 'the science-ejected vitalism that dare not speak its name'.

CAND & CASS: Naturopathic Medicine Week is May 3-9

here, I cite from CAND first, then CASS regarding NMW:

001. the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors [CAND] states:

001.a. in "Naturopathic Medicine Week May 3-9" [vsc 2010-04-23]:

"naturopathic doctors (NDs) will be hanging up their lab coats [how sciencey!] during Naturopathic Medicine Week [NMW...happening] across Canada May 3-9 [...] to teach members of the community about natural medicine [...] and the benefits of  naturopathic medicine [...see] British Columbia Naturopathic Association, www.bcna.ca; Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine, www.binm.org; Alberta Association of Naturopathic Practitioners, www.naturopathic-alberta.com; Saskatchewan Association of Naturopathic Practitioners, www.sanp.ca; Manitoba Naturopathic Association, www.mbnd.ca; Ontario Association of Naturopathic Doctors, www.oand.org; Nova Scotia Association of Naturopathic Doctors, www.nsand.ca."

Note: naturopathic, naturopathic, naturopathic.

 001.b. in  "What is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2010-04-23]:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends [etc....] the naturopathic philosophy is to stimulate the healing power of the body [HPB, coded vitalism] naturopathic treatments are chosen based on the individual patient – their physiological, structural, psychological, social, spiritual [supernaturalism], environment and lifestyle factors [...] natural therapies including botanical medicine, clinical nutrition, hydrotherapy, homeopathy [!!! etc....] the naturopathic medical profession’s infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing, national standards of practice, participation in many federal health committee initiatives, and a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research."

Note: so, we get the nonsense of the blended distinct, and we get coded vitalism which is business-as-usual, supernaturalism, homeopathy, and the label of professionalism and a supposed science committment.

001.c. in "What Can It Do For You?" [vsc 2010-04-23]:

"the naturopathic philosophy is to stimulate the healing power of the body [HPB] and to treat the root cause of disease."

Note: and that's all you are told.  Coded vitalism again.

001.d. in "History of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-04-23]:

"Hippocrates, a Greek physician who lived 2400 years ago, first formulated the concept of 'the healing power of nature' [HPN]. This concept has long been at the core of medicine around the world and remains one of the central principles of naturopathic medicine."

Note: codes, codes, codes.  Hijacking the Big H.

001.e. in "Guiding Principles" [vsc 2010-04-23]:

"naturopathic doctors are guided by six principles [...a] set of principles emphasized throughout a naturopathic doctor's training [which] outlines the naturopathic approach to health and healing and forms the foundation of this distinct form of health care [...from #1] acknowledge and respect the individual's healing process [coded vitalism...#2] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [...] this ordered and intelligent healing ability [coded vitalism]."

Note: so, the CAND's actual definition page for the principles of naturopathy veil naturopathy's actual vitalistic context in naturalistic language.  This is typical.

001.f. digging deeper, a global google.com search with the parameters  >cand.ca "vital force"< results in the CAND page "Natural Therapies" [vsc 2010-04-23] which states:

"homeopathic medicine [...a] powerful [!!!] system of medicine [...] when carefully matched to the patient they are able to affect the body's 'vital force' [vitalism] and to stimulate the body's innate healing forces [vitalistic healing...] traditional Chinese medicine / acupuncture.  The key principle that defines and connects all of Chinese medicine is that of chi, or vital energy [vitalism]. The chi of all organs must be in balance, neither too active nor too dormant, for a person to be healthy. The chi of the body's organs and systems are all connected in meridians or channels that lie just under the skin. A naturopathic doctor will use Eastern herbs and acupuncture to assist the body in regulating the chi and achieving balance."

Note: the same is roughly said here by CAND [vsc 2010-04-23].  Notice that the explanation of naturopathy's primary premise of HPN there does not transparently communicate naturopathy's essential vitalistic science-ejected context.  But, from the above, we have vitalism as the core of naturopathy's homeopathy and naturopathy's acupuncture, two of naturopathy's flagship therapeutics, and overall that is the core of the 'naturopathic natural.'  

Here's naturopathy's central textbook all about that vitalistic context, if you have any doubts: "the vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the
healing power of nature [p.034]."

Here is that concept on science's junk pile.   

Here is CAND talking up 'science, science, science' [vsc 2010-04-23].

 Here is CAND on Youtube with the label "science based natural medicine" [vsc 2008-04-06] overarching naturopathy.

002. the Center for Inquiry's Committee for the Advancement of Scientific Skepticism [CASS] states in "Center for Inquiry: Homeopathy Week a Skeptical Success":

"WHAW has gone [...] homeopathy is part of a scope of practice used by naturopaths, embracing a theory of 'vitalism' based upon an incorporeal spirit. Naturopathic Medicine Week will be celebrated May 3rd to 9th. CASS will be ready to confront more bad science [...] World Homeopathy Awareness Week (WHAW), organized as a celebration of homeopathy, was successfully hijacked by the skeptical community and critical appraisals of homeopathy dominated the internet. CASS engages with scientific, technological and medical claims made in public discourse, addressing misinformation by promoting evidence-based science. CFI - which runs CASS - is a registered educational charity promoting science and secularism."

Note: I totally agree.  In sum, I'd characterize the vitalism of naturopathy, their often disguised healing context, as a belief in a 'purposeful life spirit.'  Now, if I really want to inflict big philosophical words on the reader I'd state it as an amalgam of: vitalism, spiritism, teleology and autoentheism.

Naturopathy's #2 Principle at CAND.ca -- The Vitalism CAND Dare Not Transparently Communicate:

here, I quote from the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors' [CAND] opaque description of the #2 essential principle of naturopathy, HPN-VMN [see 001., below]; and then I provide a little transparency [see 002., below]:

001. CAND states in "Guiding Principles" [vsc 2010-03-08]:

"naturopathic doctors are guided by six principles [...] emphasized throughout a naturopathic doctor's training [...that form] the foundation of this distinct form of health care [...#2] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [HPN-VMN...] the powerful and inherent healing ability of your body, mind and spirit [...an] ordered and intelligent healing ability." 

 

Note: and that's all you get.  There is NO MENTION -- in any straightforward kind of manner -- of the actual context of this #2 principle, which is that human physiology is run by a 'purposeful life spirit' aka 'vital force'.

002. upon the preponderance:

when the beast is cornered and light is shone upon it [when HPN-VMN is decoded], #2 is a sectarian vitalistic context that is thoroughly science-discarded.

Note: what kind of supposed 'profession' opaquely communicates its essential premise?

 

Not much different from Scientology getting their foot in the door with a personality test!

CAND NDs Falsely Claim the Ethical High Ground: BCNA Accuses BCMA of Deception 2009:

here, I cite an accusation by the British Columbia Naturopathic Association [BCNA] that the British Columbia Medical Association [BCMA] is being deceptive when describing naturopathy's scientific basis [see 001. & 002., below]; yet, if you look at what is 'essentially naturopathic' -- their vitalism, supernaturalism, autoentheism & kind -- you find that such 'articles of faith' are well-without scientific support [see 003.a.-003.c., below]; also, I offer a diagnosis of naturopathy's 'knowledge typification retardedness' -- what I've termed 'epistemic conflation' [see 003.d., below]; and, regarding the actual ethical high ground, I take a look at a statement concerning why it is improper to label naturopathy a "profession" [see 004., below]:

001. the BCNA's homepage states {2009-03-09}:

"the BC Medical Association: misinformed [i.], and spreading deceptive [ii.] and disingenuous [iii.] comment not in the interest of patient care."

Note: some definitions [courtesy of the AHD 4th ed.]: i. "to provide with incorrect information"; ii. "the use of deceit [falseness]"; iii. "not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating." So, BCNA says that BCMA is basically being misleading, false, and acting in bad-faith.

002. BCNA then links to this pdf which states:

"[in spite of the BCMA's contention] there is no 'ND biology' or science education that is any different than the science education MDs receive [...& quoting Pelletier, NDs have] 'solid grounding in biomedical sciences' [...naturopathy is a] profession [also, BCNA's Cassie states naturopathy & its principles are "science based" here {yes, they've spelled naturopathy wrong in that web address}]."

Note: specifically, BCNA is accusing BCMA of lying about naturopathy's scientific foundation. BCNA is stating that naturopathy is scientific, and that their science is in fact mainstream science. Also, BCNA is stating that they live up the ethical strictures of the professions. I beg to hugely differ: it is naturopathy that is in fact not scientific, essentially [they have unlimited the boundaries of science to include, absurdly: the science-ejected, the science-unsupported, and the unscienceable!!!], and it is in fact naturopathy that is engaging in deceit, incorrect information, and bad-faith [see 003., below].

003. naturopathy's nonscientific essential principles:

003.a. vitalism:

naturopathy is essentially vitalistic.

Note: vitalism is in fact hugely nonscientific.

003.b. supernaturalism:

here are some examples.

Note: supernaturalism is in fact hugely unscienceable.

003.c. autoentheism [the belief that the "life force" within oneself is god; self-divinity & kind]:

see my notes from ND school.

Note: as a supernaturalism / theism of a particular stripe, this sectarian premise is also hugely unscienceable.

003.d. overall, naturopathy's 'epistemic pathology' is this retardation [science has progressed, they developmentally haven't!]:

***the conflation of the scientific and the nonscientific then all labeled scientific aka epistemic conflation.

Note 01: now, BCNA lists naturopathy's principles on the Cassie page I cited above, stating after them "embracing these tenets [003.a. particularly], on a science-based platform." The primary principle, "vis medicatrix naturae" [003.a.] isn't even honestly described on this page as being the actual 'purposeful life spirit / god power within you' woo that it actually is! So, therein, it is BCNA that can be best described as misleading, false, and acting in bad-faith. Naturopathy does not accurately describe themselves, they falsely label themselves, and then they have the nerve to posture from an supposedly ethically righteous position.

Note 02: as a result, naturopathy's self-labeling of "science" is really meaningless, because for naturopathy, science is no longer science at all. This seems like thought from 1000 years ago, when any kind of knowledge could have been labeled science [the Latin 'to know' -- the NDs don't seem to acknowledge that science isn't just a stick-on label that can be applied to any kind of knowledge]. But, truly, an article of faith isn't even processable through science, and naturopathy's ultimate claim that an article of faith is the same thing as the science-based is hugely science-illiterate.

004. the strictures of the professions. Ironically, the university that ripped me off -- I was a UB ND student 1998-2002 -- has a current faculty member who recently coauthored a very useful paper concerning the professions and sectarian medicine:

"the professions, which classically included medicine, law and the ministry, are vocations whose members 'profess' to have knowledge that the laity do not comprehend. Given the asymmetry of knowledge between professionals and the laity, society has granted to the professions a certain degree of autonomous control over themselves. However, this social contract demands that each profession, and each professional, place the well-being of society and the patient, client or parishioner ahead of the profession and professional [fiduciary duty]. Lay persons put their faith in the professional following the dictum credat emptor (let the buyer have faith) rather than caveat emptor (let the buyer beware). This social contract imparts great freedom on all professions, but with this freedom comes great responsibility. When an individual consults a member of any of the medical professions, it is reasonably expected that the advice and treatment that he or she receives is based in science, not metaphysics or pseudoscience. In addition, it is reasonably expected that the services he or she receives are being provided for the primary purpose of benefiting the patient, and not for any other reason. The financial benefit to the professional is secondary, and results from the degree of clinical benefit received by the patient. Patients place their faith in the professional, and trust that they will not be subject to fraud, abuse or quackery."

Note: self-labeled science but essentially HUGELY not science, naturopathy doesn't even meet the legal standards of regular commerce per 'caveat emptor' -- you do not get what they claim they are selling [as a patient, as a person going to one of their schools etc.]. Therein, it is absurd to call this fraudulent area 'professional'.