Hangee-Bauer, C. (ND Bastyr 1984) states in "President's Message: Science and Naturopathic Medicine" (2011-02-16) [and my musings]:
"I am no stranger to science. I still find it fascinating and appreciate the many ways it helps us understand the workings of nature and the world, helping us separate what appears to be the truth of things from reality [...] in school, I was a science geek and took every course in biology, chemistry, physics, etc., I could. When I went to college at Florida State University, my major was biology, with dual minors in chemistry and physics [...and he speaks of] the natural world around me [...and] natural settings."
So, we got science admittedly leading to knowledge about the natural, real world.
"Our medicine, as well as all other systems of medicine, are really a combination of science and art. When we work with our patients, we draw from both in order to stimulate the vis [!!!] and provide well-rounded care to our patients."
Ut-oh. So, the vis appears. This is naturopathy's science-ejected vitalistic premise. It couches all that is naturopathic. And it truly is science-exterior, like naturopathy's supernaturalism. Interesting that Hangee-Bauer's web page supposedly explaining naturopathy codes this concept. I, personally, think that's not enough information for the public to gauge naturopathy upon. Vis should be clearly stated as the science-ejected medically irrelevant belief centered upon a figmentatious 'purposeful life spirit' which is believed to be responsible for physiology. Then, informed consent could better happen.
"It has become an increasing concern to me when I read articles and blogs on the Internet [probably not my blog, perhaps Orac's] blasting naturopathic medicine for being 'unscientific' [...they're] biased misrepresentations of the truth. They often lambast our profession and philosophy as unscientific."
But, YOU just invoked vitalism as the centerpiece of the naturopathic, and your naturopathic philosophy that falsely places the label of science upon that which is not within science or supportable by science. Please, stop whining. The nonscientific status of the nonscientific is not bias, it's logical fact.
"As a student at Bastyr University, I remember Dr. Joe Pizzorno saying that if our profession is to be taken seriously by the larger world of medicine, we must speak in a language that everyone can understand and appreciate. That language is the language of science, and few have done more over the past 25 years than Dr. Pizzorno to increase the credibility of the naturopathic profession using this approach [...] when evaluating the efficacy of our therapies and approaches to practicing medicine, advancing the research and science agenda remains an important step for our profession to move forward, especially with the continued interest in evidence-based approaches to health care."
Ah, that great thinker ND Pizzorno who calls the science-ejected science [see his book Total Wellness]. In fact, Bastyr's whole 'science-based body mind spirit nature' nonsense is the hugest institutional irrationalism I've ever seen.
"On August 16, 2011, the Tuesday before the start of the 2011 AANP Convention, the AANP will be sponsoring a scientific summit."
Great. Suggestion: invite the crew from the Science Based Medicine blog. Have them objectively evaluate your current contents. Gut what isn't medically scientific and is in fact science-ejected. Look at what is left. It won't be 'the naturopathic'. It will be the areas of health care that stand alone anyway, and are scientifically supported.
