Facebook: An Advertising Platform For Naturopathy's False 'Science Basis Claim' - 3 Examples

here, I pursue the first-page results of a google.com search of Facebook [FB] using the parameters "site:facebook.com "science based" naturopathic" [without the external quotes] particularly with an eye towards North American AANP-CAND-AANMC ND / NMD practitioners' advertising [see 001., below]; I've commented along the way:

001. today's search results include:

001.a. the FB page "Naturopathic Family Care" [NFC; vsc 2011-01-10] which states:

"dedicated to providing quality science-based information about alternative and complementary medicine. Our team consists of licensed naturopathic physicians."

So, the naturopathic qualification supposedly provides a background to therein discus the 'science-based medical'.

NFC's FB info page [vsc 2011-01-10] links to their practice page [vsc 2011-01-10].

There, at the page "Our Physicians" [vsc 2011-01-10], we're told that the NMDs are: DiCampli, J. (SCNM), Kerievsky, R. (SCNM 2000), Marchese, M. (NCNM 2002), Niechwiadowicz, M. (SCNM), Orona, S. (NCNM), Pseka, J. (?),  Tamburri, P. (?).

Now, the explanation of homeopathy by this seven-NMD practice, "Homeopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-10] states:

"homeopathy is a highly effective treatment for both acute and chronic conditions ranging from allergies and migraines to depression and concentration problems."

Note: but we know quite well that homeopathy is actually science-ejected in terms of its plausibility and its efficacy (see http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2714).  So much for science-based commercial information through the FB portal.  Instead, this is the 'not scientific overall in context' [the essentially naturopathic] being falsely labeled science and traded upon.

001.b. the page "Sakura Naturopathic Clinic + Organic Spa" [vsc 2011-01-10] which states:

"Sakura is a naturopathic clinic and organic spa catering to health conscious, environmentally concerned individuals in Southern Georgian Bay [Ontario]. We provide safe, effective, science-based natural solutions to common health conditions and skin concerns." 

That page then links to this practice page with Jones, A. (ND CCNM) as the principle ND, and she states the same "science-based natural" claim.

Naturopathy is also claimed at the practice as "science-based" in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-10].

It is the Ontario Association of Naturopathic Doctors, where Jones is geographically and of which she is a member, that tells us in "Where's the Healing?" [vsc 2011-01-10]:

"being 'holistic' can go beyond finding the right supplement, botanical extract, homeopathic remedy or [acupuncture] point. It is being able to contact the deeper essence of a person, whether you call it the spirit, soul or vital force."

Note: where is the science-based also the science-exterior supernatural: naturopathy.  So, again, the 'not scientific overall in context' [the essentially naturopathic] being falsely labeled science and traded upon!

001.c. the page "Naturopathic Advantage -- Dr. Theresa Martez, ND [Bastyr]" [vsc 2011-01-10] which states:

"[that they] utilize science-based lab testing."

That FB page links to this practice page.

Martez  states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-10]:

"a licensed naturopathic physician (N.D.) attends a four-year graduate level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. [...having studied] the basic medical sciences [...and speaks of the] science of naturopathic medicine."  

So, science science science.  I don't see how the science is the same as regular science when it equates itself with the nonscientific / science-exterior.  It simply is insane too, to say that such things as the supernatural are science-based.

We're also told on that page:

"the naturopathic physician’s oath [...includes] 'I will use methods of treatment which follow the principles of naturopathic medicine [...including #2] to act in cooperation with the healing power of nature' [which is the vital force mentioned by another ND above, coded...] naturopathic medicine upholds the highest of standards through the adherence to the principles listed below [...#2] the healing power of nature [...] an inherent self-healing process [...] an intelligent process [...] this inherent self-healing process [again, coded vitalism]."

So, coded vitalism is the core of naturopathy, and it is not often enough transparently communicated!  When are the highest standards insanity: naturopathy.

We're also told: "we aim to educate our patients."  Quite ironic.

A Facebook Conversation With ND Maloney [wherein he awards me a gold medal]

here, I share a textual exchange I had with ND Maloney that occurred through Facebook in August of this year [see 001., below]; then I talk a little bit about his alma mater NCNM [see 002., below]:

001. ND Maloney [ND NCNM 2002] (this is his practice page) began the exchange [my comments are centered in blue, the original exchange is right justified]:

"[the ND] I read through your some of your UB stuff and it sounds like you got a bum rap

[a bum rap is usually when you are accused of something you didn't do, so I don't really know what he's saying here because I've not been accused of anything, I'm the accuser]

[...] I'm writing a book [...] the goal is not ultimately to promote or trash anything, it's to make sure stuff like what happened to you doesn't happen to anyone else 

[perhaps he is writing a book; how nice to engage in some kind of education consumer protection; perhaps it is like this ND's book on naturopathy (ISBN 0977655245)]

[...] I don't disagree with anything you wrote

[oh, I think we disagree on a lot of things! E.g.: you practice homeopathy, apparently!]

[...and he asks me some questions (Q)...here are my answers (A) to a few]

Q: "Trashing." A: If anything is being trashed, it is science,  professional standards, human rights, and ethical rigor -- by naturopathy.

Q: "Some people shouldn't become N.D.s." A: Since 'the naturopathic' is essentially an irrational ruse, NOBODY should.

Q: I wondered if you'd mind if I provided a link to your site to give people a sense of the philosophical issues involved. A: My web pages are public, and it is well within fair-use rights to link to them or excerpt from them.

Q: The goal is not ultimately to promote or trash anything. A: I'd hope, if you are dealing with something 'professional,' that your goal is to promote the highest standards of professionalism. Such neurality [sp., 'neutrality']is epistemic cowardice.

Q: It's to make sure stuff like what happened to you doesn't happen to anyone else. A: That would be solved by stopping the false labelings going on by naturo.

[...and regarding a video he has up, I responded] now that I've seen the video [...] I'm rather disturbed by your admission that the naturo. route allows you to freely experiment on patients while, preponderantly, the health care system has constructed 'ethical safeties' in this modern era to protect vulnerable patients from experimental situations which may violate many human rights accords

[...the ND] goodness, now I'm a Nazi. Of course not. I have to meet the same ethical standards as the state M.D.s

[...me] I don't think naturo. has anywhere near the ethical standards of 'state M.D.s.' Take homeopathy for instance: pills with nothing in them, claimed to be medications. Or vital force and other supernatural figmentations claiming to be scientific fact

[yup; and, criticism of regular medicine still can't justify naturopathy]

[...the ND] have a look at the Wikipedia definition of the scientific method. It doesn't say anywhere that you should start out with an angry, closed mind. A closed mind in this case involves a belief system surrounding your experiences with naturopathic medicine and evidently a whole lot of false assumptions about conventional medicine

[I'm not angry, I'm appalled; my mind isn't closed because I've no dogma but a desire for evidence concerning naturopathy's claims; and my ideas about modern medicine still wouldn't excuse naturopathy, whose actions and contents must stand or fall on their own merit]

[...] I have no interest in debating the various aspects of naturopathic medicine with you. I would love for you to take that formidable intellect and point it toward your own sacred cow, modern medicine [...] it’s a corrupt system run by people making a profit, and it’s killing a lot of people

[if there are problems concerning modern medicine, they still do not excuse naturopathy; naturopathy which is so corrupt in terms of its ideas; and I'm sure you make money doing it]

[...] don’t you understand that regardless of your degree you are desperately needed to help oppose the catastrophic health care crisis we’re in right now? Forget the philosophy. It’s about doing some common sense things to help people. You could have spent the last eight years becoming the expert you should be in alternative medicine

[ah, but 'philosophy is the guide of life'; and I am an expert in naturopathy]

[...] it is an obscene waste of your brainpower to spend it deconstructing the idiots in any profession

[how about a pseudoprofession of idiocy]

[...] a big thank you from all of us N.D.s. Don’t you realize that naturopathic medicine has basically no publicity? Yelling about it only brings it to people’s attention. They won’t listen to you, they’ll just know to come see me. Because you aren’t offering any options

[we'll see]

[...] let me award you the gold medal you justly deserve. You win the debate, and it’s all hogwash. Now, could you get down off your stupid soapbox

[if only that medal equaled all the expense and damages!  I appreciate your candor concerning the hogwash.  And, I've a right to free speech and expression]

[...] no one cares about our philosophy

[well, since it tramples all over categories like science and religion -- and is false in terms of commerce -- I think this matters, even if NDs don't, I think, actually think]

[...] maybe you should take a deep breath, realize really crappy things happen to everyone, and move on"

[ah, if only justice was that simple; and who is to decode, expose and warn the general public about this racket then?]. 

002. NCNM states some serious absurdity in:

002.a. "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [(so this is science)...] these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession [professions claim]: [#1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [(hmmm, it is a sentient entity?)]; nature heals through the response of the life force [(the science-ejected)...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact [(factuality claim)], expressions of the life force [(the science-ejected)] attempting to heal itself [...] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [(the science-ejected)...] causes may occur on many levels, including physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual [(science-exterior supernaturalistic belief)...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual [(ditto)...] the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [(ditto)]."

Note: so, by decree, this page reveals that naturopathy claims as science that which isn't, and mandates certain 'faithy' articles by their practitioners and graduates to be so falsely labeled.  You take an oath to this stuff; this is their standard of practice.  It is quite certain that there is no distinction, from this 'philosophy' [retardedness?], between actual science and sectarian articles of faith.  Actual science was never done, replicated, peer-reviewed, and published to establish -- and I know it is quite irrational as a project anyway -- the logical equation of science with the science-ejected and science-unsupported.  It's lunacy.  But, according to ND Maloney, that doesn't really matter because people want options and I guess by that measure then, a used car dealer who rips people off is merely one option of many in the marketplace.

002.b. and this has been codified into Oregon law.

Q and A with the AANMC Regarding 'The Science of Naturopathy' on Facebook 2010-06

here, I recount an exchange I had at the AANMC page on Facebook.  I'd asked AANMC directly about naturopathy's science-basis, and AANMC indirectly answered [see 001.a.]. I then present a summary of AANMC's 'homeopathy and naturopathy are scientific' absurd claim, as if from their own perspective [see 001.b. etc., below]:

001.a. the recent exchange [vsc 2010-07-04]:

Q: "I've noticed that on your web site you state naturopaths' 'diagnoses and therapeutics are science based.' I was wondering if AANMC has a preferred definition of 'science'?"

A: "Rob, naturopathic medical schools require their students to study anatomy, biochemistry, human physiology, histology, human pathology, immunology, macro and microbiology, neuroscience and pharmacology in the first two years [science!]. Naturopathic physicians use science and their knowledge of holistic therapies to diagnose and treat patients. You can read more about the academic curriculum for naturopathic students by following the link below. Thank you for your question and interest in naturopathic medicine."

Note: my question wasn't directly answered, yet the impression of the AANMC answer is that naturopathy's science is 'the preponderant science.'  The AANMC linked to the AANMC page "Academic Curriculum", which makes these claims:

"naturopathic medicine students [...] are educated in the same basic sciences as allopathic physicians [...] during their first two years of study, the curriculum focuses on basic and clinical sciences and diagnostics [...] some member schools in the AANMC actually require more hours of basic and clinical science than many top allopathic medical schools [and AANMC links to ALL of their member schools]. Students of naturopathic medicine use the Western medical sciences as a foundation."

So, science, science, science -- as a foundation / base!  A word on AANMC's label "allopathic": it is a bogus label applied bogusly to modern medicine.  It is as proper to call modern medicine allopathy as it is to call modern astronomy astrology.  Wow, naturopathy is so [not] into being ACCURATE!  Now, one naturopathic statement that hugely contradicts all this "science" background / expertise / content is the absurd label that AANMC puts on naturopathy's homeopathy -- the sugar-pill treatment! -- in "AANMC Brochure" [vsc 2010-04-07]:

"the final two years [of ND school] offer comprehensive clinical training in the holistic and nontoxic approaches to disease treatment and prevention that distinguish naturopathic medicine. In their supervised, hands-on experiences with patients, students learn to scientifically apply [...] homeopathic medicine." 

Yet, homeopathy is bunk.  So bunk, in fact, that in the UK it is considered akin to witchcraft.

   

001.b. also at Facebook, AANMC claims in "Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges (AANMC)'s Photos - Naturopathic vs. Allopathic Science Hours" [vsc 2010-07-04], through one gallery diagram in particular, "An ND's Basic Science Education" [vsc 2010-07-04]:

"[first number is 'allopathic MD', second is 'naturopathic ND'] anatomy & embryology: 13, 19; histology: 6, 5; physiology: 5, 14; biochemistry: 8, 12; pathology: 10, 12; microbiology / immunology: 11, 10.5."

Note: I'd boil this down to a claim by naturopathy that naturopathy students, overall, study more basic science than regular medicine, and therein naturopathy is claiming equal in science if not more science expertise than regular medicine.  Yet, HOW does homeopathy, hugely science-implausible and without merit, get labeled "science" -- even on naturopathy's board exams?  This goes back to my question to AANMC.

So, I believe naturopathy's definition of science could be posed like this: science is like a letterhead on a blank piece of paper to us, which we then fill up with any kind of nonsense we please.

002. so, how absurd is the claim by naturopathy that 'the naturopathic survives scientific scrutiny'?  

to sum it up, this is how absurd naturopathy could be posed as: 'even when science hugely ejects profoundly nonscientific things [by definition!], we here at 'naturopathy central' still falsely label such science.  Take our homeopathy, for instance!  It's science -- to us.'

AANMC has stated quite overtly that naturopathic therapeutics and diagnostics are science based.

But, naturopathy's homeopathy hugely contradicts this claim.

Naturopathy's New Propaganda Platform - Pais's Facebook via Google:

here, I cite from a google.com web search that displays an ND's Facebook page second in the results and claims that naturopathy is a branch of medical science [see 001.a. & b., below] and that links to the ND's clinical pages that label homeopathy a science [see 001.c., below]; then, I cite from that ND's alma mater, and its huge epistemic absurdity [see 002.a., below]; and, then I cite directly from the ND luminary that is mentioned in 001.b., [see 002.b. below]; finally, I offer a summation [see 002.c., below]:

001. web searching via google.com with the parameters >naturopathic "from the sciences"< results in:

001.a. a Facebook page by Pais, G. (ND NCNM 1992, DHANP AANP 1997) that is ranked second [as of  2010-03-29] titled "What is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2010-03-26] which states:

"naturopathic physicians are trained as general practitioners specializing in natural medicine. They have a doctor of naturopathic medicine (N.D.) degree from a four-year graduate medical college with admission requirements comparable to conventional medical schools. The N.D. degree requires graduate level study in medical sciences [...] in addition to the standard medical curriculum, naturopathic students must do extensive coursework in natural therapeutics. This includes therapies from the sciences [...including] homeopathy [...] naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science[...] naturopathic medicine is a system of medicine founded on an honored medical principle: nature heals [coded vitalism]. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health [coded vitalism] and the naturopathic physician’s role is to facilitate and support this process [...] the body’s innate healing process [...] homeopathic medicine acts to strengthen the body’s innate immune response [coded vitalism...] the following principles are the foundation that naturopathic medicine is built on: [#1] the healing power of nature. Nature acts powerfully through healing mechanisms in the body and mind [coded vitalism] to maintain and restore health. Naturopathic physicians work to restore and support these inherent healing systems [coded vitalism] when they have broken down [...this is] a philosophy that works."

Note: so, there's the science claim galore, at supposed doctoral and professional levels of rigor. There's the label of science upon homeopathy [which is resoundingly NOT SCIENCE SUPPORTED].  And there's that typical ND MO: don't overtly reveal / transparently display / honestly relate naturopathy's principle article of faith: that physiology is run by a purposeful life spirit.  Instead, naturopathy obviously disguises such sectarian such and such in naturalistic language.

 

"Works?"  I'm trying to figure out how this philosophy works: equate something with what it is not, e.g. call articles of faith / the science-unsupported scientifically-derived / -supported, hide this absurd position from the public while trading on a false position.  I seriously don't think one gets past college undergraduate courses with such HUGE irrationality [never mind those at the doctoral level!].  And how can one posture the position of 'professional ethical rigor' from such falsehood? Most properly, naturopathy is in my view a mental illness.

 

001.b. a Facebook entry by Pais titled "Why Not Treat the Person Not the Disease" [psc 2010-03-29] states:

 

"Dr. Pizzorno is one of the standout naturopathic physicians of the last several decades. He is one of the world's leading authorities on science-based natural medicine."

 

Note: so, the four words most associated with Bastyr and Pizzorno are, as also reflected above, "science-based natural medicine."

 

001.c. Pais's clinical web pages, "For Optimal Health," state: 

 

001.c1. in "Classical Homeopathy" [vsc 2010-03-29]: 

 

"homeopathy is a scientific system of natural medicine [...] all together [homeopathy is] the best of both worlds — safe because they’re so dilute and powerful because of their energetic action [coded vitalism]."

 

Note: so we have the label of science upon homeopathy, and a supposed / putative 'energy' that is its mechanism that has never been measured -- like homeopathy's claimed affect.

 

001.c2. in "About Gregory Pais"[vsc 2010-03-29]: 

 

"Dr. Pais has been practicing classical homeopathy for fourteen years [...and he's] grounded in the science of wholistic medicine." 

 

Note: the wholistic is usually body,mind, spirit, nature, two of which are exterior to science [supernatualism, vitalism], and for naturopathy includes homeopathy.

 

002. analyzing NCNM, Pizzorno, and therein Pais's claims:

 

002.a. NCNM, Pais's alma mater, states in "Principles of Healing":

 

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing [...that] are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [...they are] the distinguishing marks of the profession: [#1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force."

 

Note: ok, so in just four sentences, naturopathy visits upon the public EXTREME ABSURDITY.  We have the scientific claim, we have the science claim upon the hugely not scientific.  With science equated with nonscience, I can offer no other advice to anyone who falls under the shadow of such irrationality but RUN.  A profession?  As professional as it is scientific. 

 

002.b. Pizzorno states in "Total Wellness: Improve Your Health By Understanding the Body’s Healing Systems" (1996; ISBN 0761504338):

 

"some important concepts [are fundamental to naturopathy]. The healing power of nature  (vis medicatrix naturae). Our bodies have a tremendous ability to heal [coded vitalism...] natural healers refer to this inherent drive as 'the healing power of nature' or the vis medicatrix naturae [coded vitalism...] our underlying healing systems [p.003...] the routes to total wellness. Seven underlying, health-sustaining systems of our body must function effectively to ensure our well-being, prevent disease, and allow a full life [...including] our life-force (or spirit) [overt vitalism, equated with the supernatural]. Weakness in any of these seven systems results in susceptibilities that allow most common diseases to develop. Follow the recommendations below, strengthen all of these seven systems, and total wellness is yours [p.024...] live in harmony with your life-force [p.026 ...] live in harmony with the  psychosocial/spiritual/life-force [overt vitalism, equated with supernatural and some kind of 'social mind' whatever... p.317...] in mind/body medicine, the placebo effect is recognized as a marshaling of our self-healing abilities -- the life-force within each of us, which naturopathic physicians call the vis medicatrix naturae [overt vitalism...] it is increased awareness of and access to this teleological force, the healer within [in sum, the life force is a purposeful life spirit], that is the essence of each of us [p.333...] life force. See spiritual system [again, overt vitalism equated with the supernatural, p.410]."

 

Note: so, the leading expert in "science-based natural medicine" -- Pizzorno -- equates what is hugely not within science [vitalism, teleology, supernaturalism] with science.  That is the epistemic conflation of naturopathy -- which is a form of absurdity.  Again, run. 

 

002.c. Pais in relation: 

 

so, overall, naturopathy keeps claiming an overarching category of science-basis, while fundamentally based upon the nonscientific, which is often disguised in naturalistic language -- as Pais above demonstrates, and Pizzorno above begins from.

 

Run, run, run FAR AWAY.

Facebook Fun with the AANMC's 'We Are Science-Based' Mislabeling, 2009-11:

here, I share some communication between myself and the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [AANMC] per their Facebook page [see 001., below (I've screen-captured it [sc], in case they decide to expunge)]; and, I share my take on AANMC's 'we are CERTAINLY science-based' false self-labeling, particularly based upon what actual, scientific, academic, national organizations say about the essentially naturopathic [see 002., below]:

001. the AANMC:

001.a. has a Facebook page that states:

“considering a career in health care [?…] AANMC schools: Bastyr U., BINM, CCNM, NCNM, SCNM, UBCNM, NUHS.”

.[sc]

.

Note: this is, essentially, an advertisement.  They are attempting to increase their market with certain claims.  This is a commercial page for a claimed 'of the professions consortia' on a social networking site.

001.b. so, I asked this simple question on that AANMC page:

“I'm wondering, is naturopathy based upon science? I've heard different things, and I'd want my medicine to be science-based.”

.[sc]

.

Note: I asked this question based upon 'naturopathy is science' claims made by AANMC on their web pages, e.g. “Naturopathic Medicine - FAQs”, which states:

“q: which classes or literature would be helpful prior to enrollment in a naturopathic physician program A: for a basic science foundation and overall exposure to help prepare you for naturopathic medical studies, consider the following: read the 'Textbook of Natural Medicine' [TNM] – a very comprehensive and often-used reference among NDs and MDs as well.”

001.c. AANMC answered:

“NDs must actually spend more hours studying the sciences than in some allopathic [yikes!  a sectarian label!] medical schools. So the answer to your question is a resounding 'YES!' - naturopathic medicine definitely has its basis in science.”

.[sc]

.

Note: my jaw dropped when I read this...the confident certainty, the absoluteness!  The specific label, in terms of commerce and supposed 'professionalism'!

001.d. my comment to this [false] claim was:

“naturopathy is based upon vitalism and supernaturalism, essentially. I have the textbooks, that's a fact [e.g., TNM!]. Both concepts are in-fact-science-ejected, and therein not science based. And that's a fact.”

.[sc]

.

Note: simply put, facts. And, to quote that great line that Eugenie Scott recently wrote in the U.S. News and World Report article "Scientist Genie Scott's Last Word to Creationist Ray Comfort: There You Go Again" (2009-11-03):

"[per blogmaster Gilgoff] here's the final post in a God & Country debate between scientist Eugenie Scott, who heads the National Center for Science Education [...per Scott] 'anyone who honestly examines the data supporting evolution [& kind] — even a young-earth creationist [or other such sectarian kind] — concludes that the science is strong. If you reject evolution [& kind], you are doing it for religious reasons [& kind]. You're entitled to your religious opinions—but not to your own scientific facts' [a modification of a line often attributed to Daniel Patrick Moynihan]."

002. what I think, knowing what I know [this label of “science” upon the essentially naturopathic, by AANMC & kind, is bullshit]:

002.a. let's look at what the TNM & co. says. Naturopathy is based upon vitalism & supernaturalism [the hugely science-ejected]:

a) the TNM site has the chapter up for viewing titled "Chapter 3" [a pdf by NDs Zeff, Snider, and Myers; to be archived here].  It states:

"Dr. Sensenig [my UB instructor in 1998, here are my notes on naturopathy's essential premise, from when I was a UB ND student of his] presented 'Back to the Future: Reintroducing Vitalism as a New Paradigm' [very old vinegar, 'new wine' label -- quite egregious poison! p.004...] vitality (properties beyond physiochemical constituents) [supernatural!!!, p.032...] vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the healing power of nature [VMN=VF=HPN; and per Sensenig, VMN = autoentheism = a.k.a. god power within]. This is the first step in the hierarchy of healing and what naturopathic physicians may call the overarching clinical theory of naturopathic medicine [therein, the 'essentially naturopathic!']: the therapeutic order [p.034...] address weakened or damaged systems or organs [...e.g.] the life force [p.035...] many naturopathic modalities can be used to stimulate the overall vital force [...] an entire physiologic system (immune, cardiovascular, detoxification, life force, endocrine, etc.) [p.036]".

Note: so, the essentially naturopathic is based upon the vitalistic, and a form of theism [minimally] -- when you boil it down.

b) UBCNM, where Sensenig taught me in 1998 under what I consider completely false labels [UB labels naturopathy science, still / to this day -- a page to be archived here ASP], states

in "Six Guiding Principles [#3]" [archived here]:

"illiness [illness!!!] is a purposeful process [teleological!] of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact [a claimed fact!], an expression of the life force [vitalism!] attempting to heal itself [...] this healing process [...] he [the!] viz [vis!] medicatrix naturae."

c) and the supernatural.  The TNM chapter cited above also states regarding the essentially naturopathic supernatural:

"[the TNM also speaks of] mental/spiritual remedies [p.029...] part of the reason for the failures within modern medical science is the mechanistic basis of it, with its fundamental ignorance of and disrespect for [...] the natural laws of physiology governing health and healing, and especially for all things spiritual [p.032...] psycho-emotional/spiritual state [p.033...] the naturopathic physician evaluates the patient with these areas in mind, looking for aspects of disturbance, first in the spirit [p.034...] spiritual integrity. Humans are spiritual beings. They are spirits that reside within bodies. Though the general purview of the physician is the body, that instrument cannot be separated from the spirit, which animates it. If the spirit is disturbed, the body cannot be fundamentally healthy [...] disturbance in the spirit permeates the body and eventuates in physical manifestation [...] at colleges of naturopathic medicine in Australia and North America, faculty work with naturopathic medicine students to develop their ability to perceive the spiritual nature of an individual [p.035...] as [NDs] Pizzorno and Snider wrote: 'we are natural organisms, our genomes developed and expressed in the natural world. The patterns and processes inherent in nature are inherent in us. We exist as part of complex patterns of matter, energy, and spirit' [p.036...] the patient as a whole being: spiritual, mental/emotional, and physical [p.038]."

Note: so, the essentially naturopathic, per AANMC member school UBCNM, is based upon the teleological and vitalistic.  We also get a glimpse of UB naturopathic supernaturalism in "Six Guiding Principles [#4]", and a requirement for supernaturalism from UB NDs in "Six Guiding Principles [#5]".  Vitalism is hugely science-ejected.  As well as supernaturalism. According to the National Center for Science Education [NCSE] hosted page "Appendices: Science; Transitional Fossils; and Embryos":

"by now it should be clear that vitalistic and supernatural hypotheses that invariably postulate vague and amorphous mechanisms whose workings are beyond human comprehension are untestable and uninformative and hence not scientific. In fact they are not even explanations, but statements of unsolvable mysteries beyond the powers of scientific investigation."

002.b.  Pizzorno, J.E. (ND NCNM 1975), that self-proclaimed "science-based natural medicine" dean of this naturopathy revival, sums up the 'sectarian absurdity amalgam' which is the 'naturopathic belief system mislabeled as science' in his article "A Systems Approach to Wellness" excepted from his book "Total Wellness":

"[to be well, you must] live in harmony with your life-force [...] each of us needs to become more aware of the activity of the vis medicatrix naturae (life-force) deep within us [...] seven underlying, health-sustaining systems of our body must function effectively to ensure our well-being, prevent disease, and allow a full life [...including] our life-force (or spirit). Weakness in any of these seven systems results in susceptibilities that allow most common diseases to develop. Follow the recommendations below, strengthen all of these seven systems, and total wellness is yours."

Note: quite a promise.  That naturopathy is science-based is quite a false promise, and in fact absurd. I summarize this fundamental naturopathic science-ejected premise as 'purposeful life spirit', to encapsulate its teleological, vitalistic, and supernatural-spiritistic sectarian characteristic.  The fact that it is mislabeled as science and often disguised is unforgivable.

003. it has been fun playing with AANMC on Facebook.  I look forward to more exchanges.