How the AMSA Loves Naturopathy - Enough to Promote Naturopathic Opacity and Have ND D'Adamo Speak at AMSA's 2011 Convention

here, I cite from the naturopathy promotion page of the American Medical Student Association [see 001., below]; then, from their promotional material which states that ND D'Adamo will speak at their 2011 convention [see 002., below]:

001. AMSA states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [saved 2011-03-10]:

"naturopathic medicine has as its basis the premise that the body has an innate intelligent force [IIF] capable of healing itself [coded vitalism] and our duty as physicians is to support that process by stimulating that force [coded vitalism...] naturopathic physicians (NDs) attend 4 year full-time residential medical schools and are primary care providers trained in conventional medical sciences [...] all licensed NDs must complete four years of graduate medical education at a school accredited by the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education (CNME) and pass a two-step board examination (similar to USMLE Steps 1 and 2) [NPLEX]. Currently, 16 states, the District of Columbia and the US territories of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands have licensing laws for naturopathic doctors."

Note: now for some information.  That IIF is a coding for the science-ejected idea of vitalism.  There is no such force, scientifically speaking.  It's nonsense.  How do you stimulate a figmentation?  Now, a science background is claimed for NDs, but isn't it a basic premise of science that you actually have EVIDENCE?  Where is the evidence of this IIF figmentation?  Aren't IQs dropping at the medical doctorate level! Without such evidence, but in still claiming such via science, naturopathy is a belief system falsely posing as scientifically based.  The schools of the CNME in fact label the science-ejected science, on their own web pages.  The exam labels same said.  The oversight organizations at the '.gov' state level also perpetrate this falsehood.  Why would AMSA want to be involved with this?  Why doesn't AMSA state this actual context on their naturopathy web page, and instead is complicit in this manipulative opacity?

002. AMSA states in "Don't Miss Dr. D'Adamo at the Convention on Saturday, March 12 5pm!" [saved 2011-03-10]:

"[Rebecca Snowden posts] hello convention-goers! I want to take this moment to explain to you all a jewel that awaits you at Convention.  Dr. Peter D'Adamo will be presenting on the implementation of holistic principles into modern medical practice [...via] personalized genomics [...] he is known to millions of readers worldwide for his New York Times bestselling Eat Right For Your Type [BTD] series of books, which detail the link between blood group polymorphisms, secretory variations in the gut, and their consequential use in nutritional and dietary optimization."

Note: regarding the BTD, the Mayo Clinic has this to say: "there's no sound scientific evidence that the so-called blood type diet is any more effective or any more beneficial for weight loss than is any other diet [...] there's no solid research evidence to support claims about a blood type diet."  Time Magazine had this to say about D'Adamo's genotype diet: "if there's anything scientifically sound about any of this, we haven't seen the signs."

Great company AMSA keeps.  Quite a jewel.  I'd argue that a chief holistic / naturopathic principle is to label as science that which is not.  Period.  Be it vitalism, supernaturalism, the science-ejected, the science-unsupported, the science-exterior. D'Adamo is a Bastyr grad., and their motto is that within science is the science-ejected vitalistic and supernatural.  Enough said.

Gushing Over the Blood Type Diet at The Telegraph, and then Actual Science:

here, I cite from a recent Telegraph article promoting naturopath D'Adamo's Blood Type Diet [BTD; see 001., below]; then I cite heavy-weight criticism of the whole apparent woo [see 002., below]:

001. Walden, C. (? ?) states in "The Blood-Type Diet: Weight Loss Need Not Be in Vein" (2010-06-16):

"ever since Cheryl Cole put her steadily dwindling figure down to the blood-type diet 'Eat Right For Your Type', British women have been pulling up their sleeves and baring their veins to nutritionists all over the country. First advocated by Peter D'Adamo, a naturopathic physician who believed he had found a link between a person's blood type and the foods their bodies would best be able to digest and absorb, the blood-type diet claims to be as much about health, energy and longevity as it is about weight loss [...] Carole Symons, a medical herbalist and nutrition adviser [...states] 'the future is clearly in the more accurate science of nutrigenomics' [...] this new science involves studying the effects of food on our genes in order to understand the relationship between nutrition and health [...] having ascertained that I'm blood type A Rhesus negative, she makes a few preliminary diagnoses [...] generally speaking, type As should stick to vegetarian-based diets; Bs to a varied diet of meat, grains, dairy and vegetables; ABs should be mainly vegetarian, with occasional meat, fish and dairy; and Os should stick to meat-based diets."

Note: how the article promises 'more accurate science.'  The author apparently doesn't have any medical or scientific credentials.  Her bio. at the Telegraph states "Celia Walden is a novelist and commentator who writes caustically about many troubling aspects of modern life, from male grooming to talkative taxi drivers."  I guess the hair and the punning balance out the whole thing.  Deep.

002. criticisms of the BTD, which are not hard to find even for a novelist, include:

002.a. the Mayo Clinic states "there's no scientific evidence to support the so-called 'blood type diet.'" 

002.b. Wikipedia states:

"the consensus among dietitians, physicians, and scientists is that the theory is unsupported by scientific evidence [...and] another criticism is that there are no clinical trials of the Blood Type Diet. In his first book Eat Right 4 Your Type, D'Adamo mentions being in the eighth year of a 10 year cancer trial, but the results of this trial have never been published."

Note: sounds like a long wait for a train that ain't coming.

003. it's interesting when journalists don't adhere to journalistic standards, and instead become acolytes.