Inspired by Scienceblogs.com - RI on Naturo. and Homeo., and My Expansion of the Matter

here, I cite from Scienceblogs.com's Respectful Insolence blog concerning the relationship between naturopathy and homeopathy [see 001., below]; then, I list 13 random AANP-type naturopaths who label their mandatory homeopathy "science", from my archives [see 002., below]; finally, I expand upon the naturopathic pseudostructuring of knowledge types as a type of 'epistemic pathology' [see 003., below]:

001. Orac writes in "You Can't Have Naturopathy Without Homeopathy" (2011-01-28):

"the bottom line is that, for how badly its practitioners want to represent naturopathy as science-based and rational, in reality naturopathy is anything but [hear, hear! it is truly the reversal of all values]. It embraces virtually any form of CAM therapy [sCAMs!], no matter how irrational, and its practitioners simply choose what subset of woo they want to use in their practice. If you want to know just how credulous and pseudoscientific naturopathy is, just remember that not only is homeopathy embraced by naturopaths, but knowledge of homeopathic practice is mandatory. It's taught by naturopathy schools, and naturopaths have to know enough about it to pass the NPLEX, which includes homeopathy on it. Homeopathy and naturopathy: two crappy woos that taste crappy together [damn, I thought 'like cures like', and the woos would sum to zero!  So much for that 'law']."

Note: yes, you cannot graduate from North American ND / NMD schools without taking their homeopathy series of courses and treating a certain amount of patients in their clinics homeopathically [this was certainly true when I was in ND school, and it is homeopathy that principly disgusted me most about that experience at the University of Bridgeport to the point that I stopped my schooling in the forth year].  But, NPLEX not only requires homeopathy, it falsely labels homeopathy a "clinical science".  Homeopathy is as much as science as the reading of tea leaves, astrology, the laying on of hands, and Mesmerism.  Yes, that is falsehood on a supposed professional licensure exam!  Irrationality marches on!

But, homeopathy is not the principle issue regarding the 'pathology of the natural' / naturopathy.  Removing homeopathy from naturopathy would merely be removal of a diseased branch of a diseased tree, and then incorrectly stating that the tree is well.  As I go through this post, we'll approach the trunk of that tree, the nexus of the disease afflicting the whole tree: what I see as naturopathy's principle 'knowledge type disease'.  I choose the tree metaphor because naturopathy does too.  It labels itself from the very top [here too] and from the very bottom one of the "branches of medical science".  But, that wouldn't be science from this world; it might be science in Bizarro World.

002. 'homeopathy is science' according to:

002.a. Palka, K. (ND SCNM) who states in "About Naturopathic Doctors" [vsc 2011-01-16]:

"curricula at the seven accredited naturopathic medical schools are comparable in basic medical sciences, such as anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, microbiology, pharmacology, to traditional medical school.  In addition, naturopathic science courses include nutrition, botanical medicine, homeopathy, physical medicine, hydrotherapy, mind/body medicine and other therapeutics."

002.b. Pratt, S. (ND NCNM 2004) who states in "Education and Licensing" [vsc 2010-06-11]:

"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. [...] to enter into the clinical training of the third year, students must pass all basic sciences and diagnostic courses [...] NPLEX is the standard examination used by all licensing jurisdictions for naturopathic physicians in North America. It includes 5 basic science exams (anatomy, physiology, pathology, biochemistry, microbiology and immunology) taken after the first 2 years of medical school. The clinical science examinations are taken following graduation after the 4th year of school. They include: clinical and physical diagnosis, laboratory diagnosis and diagnostic imaging, botanical medicine, pharmacology, nutrition, physical medicine, homeopathy, minor surgery, psychology and lifestyle counseling, and emergency medicine."

002.c. Kanevski, J. (ND Bastyr 2006) who states in "Our Services" [vsc 2009-02-10]:

"the medical science of homeopathy was founded by a German physician, Samuel Hahnemann about 200 years ago. It is being used extensively in Europe, Israel, and India. It is gaining popularity in the United States. Health professionals that practice homeopathy include naturopathic physicians, osteopathic doctors, medical doctors, chiropractors, veterinarians, and trained professional homeopaths."

002.d.  Kargman, S. (NMD SCNM) who states in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-08]:

"naturopathic physicians (N.D.s or N.M.D.s) are general practitioners trained as specialists in natural medicine. They are educated in conventional medical sciences as well as complementary modalities. Naturopathic physicians treat disease and restore health using therapies from the sciences of clinical nutrition, botanical medicine, homeopathy, physical medicine, exercise therapy, counseling, Oriental medicine and acupuncture, natural childbirth, and hydrotherapy [...] naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science."

002.e. Coe, C. (BINM), Gallant, J. (ND BINM), Vandekerkhove, A. (ND BINM) who state in "What Is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2011-01-29]:

"naturopathic physicians are trained in the conventional medical sciences and pathology to diagnose in a manner similar to medical doctors (MDs) […] they use therapies from the sciences of clinical nutrition, botanical medicine, homeopathy, physical medicine, clinical psychology, acupuncture and traditional Chinese medicine […] naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medicine."

002.f.  Cohen, H. (ND CCNM 1990) who states in "Dictionary" [vsc 2011-01-29]:

"homeopathy is a holistic medical science […] homeopathy practiced by naturopathic physicians, WHEREAS homeopathy has been an integral part of naturopathic medicine since its inception and is a recognized specialty for which the naturopathic profession has created a distinct specialty organization, the Homeopathic Academy of Naturopathic Physicians, WHEREAS homeopathy has been recognized, through rigorous testing and experimentation, as having significant scientific evidence supporting its efficacy and safety […] naturopathic medicine, sometimes called 'naturopathy,' is as old as healing itself and as new as the latest discoveries in biochemical sciences […] the naturopathic medical profession's infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing by a growing number of states, national standards of practice and care, peer review, and an ongoing commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...] naturopathic medicine […is a] science […] 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. Methods used are consistent with these principles […] a licensed naturopathic physician (ND) attends a four-year graduate level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an MD."

002.g.  Coward, S. (ND SCNM), Lewis, K. (ND SCNM) who state in "Misconceptions Aside, Homeopathy Has Stood the Test of Time" (2009-06-25):

"homeopathy is a 200-year-old medicinal science."

002.h. Cronin, B. (ND Bastyr 2002) who states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-06-23]:

"in addition to the basic medical sciences and conventional diagnostics, the naturopathic doctor is required to complete additional training in therapeutic nutrition, homeopathy, botanical medicine, physical medicine and counseling. A naturopathic doctor takes rigorous professional basic science and clinical board examinations so that he or she may be licensed by a state or jurisdiction [...] naturopathic diagnostic and therapies are supported by scientific research drawn from peer-reviewed journals from many disciplines, including naturopathic medicine, conventional medicine, complementary medicine, clinical nutrition, etc.."

002.i. Bailetti, K. (ND CCNM) who states in "About Katia Bailetti ND" [vsc 201-01-23]:

"licensed naturopathic doctors in Ontario have achieved the following training [...] successful completion of North American licensing exams including basic sciences, (anatomy, biochmistry [sp., biochemistry], microbiology, immunology, physiology and pathology), as well as clinical sciences (physical and clinical diagnosis, laboratory diagnosis and diagnostic imaging, pharmacology, emergency medicine, clinical nutrition, physical medicine, botanical medicine, psychology, traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncture and homeopathy)".

002.j. Beaty, J.K. (ND Bastyr 1988) who states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-06-20]:

"naturopathic medicine is as much a philosophy of life as it is a science [...] naturopathic doctors [...] are educated in the conventional medical sciences, diagnostic techniques and methods, but prefer to treat disease and restore health using therapies from the sciences of clinical nutrition, herbal medicine, homeopathy, physical medicine, exercise therapy, counseling and hydrotherapy [...] we cooperate with all other branches of the medical sciences."

Overall note: I think it is clear that preponderantly -- and the naturopaths above are from the schools in the U.S. and Canada -- naturopathy claims homeopathy is science, and homeopathy is inseparable from naturopathy as it is "required" and "integral".  The Cohen link is useful because the AANP has buried its position papers.  This happened particularly after the Atwood pieces were published several years ago in MedGenMed.  Homeowatch has a 1993 version up, so its still publicly accessible.

003. naturopathy's 'epistemic pathology' by way of the  the "Textbook of Natural Medicine" (ISBN 0443073007, 2005, 3rd. ed.) sample chapter, freely available:

"many naturopathic modalities can be used to stimulate the overall vital force [vitalism, a science-ejected concept...] homeopathy and acupuncture are primary methods of such stimulation [so, now the scientific is premised on the science-ejected, science=nonscience...] humans are spiritual beings. They are spirits that reside within bodies [so, now the scientific contains the science-exterior supernatural, science subset supernaturalism]. 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 [so, now we have a conflation of knowledge-kind and ontological kind: the supernatural and the physical are one, the physician is metaphysician, the naturalistic and supernaturalistic are indistinguishable, articles of sectarian faith and scientific objective fact cannot be delineated]. Hahnemann, the brilliant founder of homeopathy [oh, they so love their homeopathy], instructs physicians thus. Disturbance in the spirit [he said lebenskraft or dynamis, which is vitalism aka life force] permeates the body and eventuates in physical manifestation [if that's not a sectarian belief system, I don't know what is]. Physicians are responsible for perceiving such disturbances and addressing them. 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."

Note: now, the book's principle editor calls naturopathy "science-based".  Yes, that is a 'knowledge type pathology' of a grand scale.  I think it approaches a 'cultic insanity' type level.  What naturopathy does is CONFLATE in order to achieve its goal: to disguise and falsely posture sectarian faithy-beliefy crap that has either been science-ejected or is simply unscienceable and therefore science-exterior, as scientific fact in order to further its market.

My expansion is simply this: even if naturopathy divorced itself from homeopathy -- if it cut off that branch, so to speak, from the tree -- it would still be naturopathy IN PRINCIPLE, literally.  It would still mislabel what is not science but instead items and methods of faith / belief / quasi-religion / sectarian medicine.

That is the trunk of the rotten epistemic tree known as naturopathy; that is the root cause, with their nutty homeopathy only a symptom of a deeper irrationalism.

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.

N.D. Hulda Clark Has Died - Hey, Nobody Really Noticed [Or Cared That Much, Which is Good]:

here, I cite recent postings by Orac and Dr. Barrett mentioning the death of naturopath Hulda Clark [see 001., below]; and I do a Google search per "Hulda Clark Dies" for a sense of her significance [see 002., below];

001.a. at Respectful Insolence, Orac writes in "Requiem For A Quack":

"what can one say about 'Dr.' Hulda Regehr Clark? I call her a quack, because that's what she was [...] this is a woman who for over two decades has [...] preyed upon the fears and scientific ignorance of average cancer patients in order to sell them useless 'cures' [...] far be it for me to be hypocritical and feign much in the way of sorrow when a woman who has done so much harm to so many patients for so many years is finally [...] rendered unable to do any further harm [...] she could rightly be called the Dark Lord of Quackery."

001.b. Dr. Barrett states in "Consumer Health Digest 09-37":

"Hulda Regehr Clark, author of The Cure for All Cancers, The Cure for All Diseases, and a few similar books, died on September 3, 2009 at the age of 80 [...] Clark wrote that all cancers and many other diseases are caused by 'parasites, toxins, and pollutants' and can be cured by killing the parasites and ridding the body of environmental chemicals [...] admirers portray her as a great 'research scientist' even though she published no scientific reports. Critics regard Clark as a quack and charge that she exploited desperate patients [and Quackwatch has the article The Bizarre Claims of Hulda Clark which states 'Clark also listed a naturopathic (N.D.) degree from the Clayton College of Natural Health' and mentions that infamous-to-me N.D. Pizzorno testified AGAINST her in terms of her zapper contraption]."

002. searching Google, per "Hulda Clark Dies" reveals some interestingly trivial rankings [these are the top three as of 2009-09-12]:

002.a. a memorial page for Dr. Clark, "to honor the legacy of healing Hulda Clark left us with";

002.b. a link to Respectful Insolence [not to say this blog is insignificant];

002.c. a link to the Cancer Treatment Watch article "How Hulda Clark Victimized My Parents" by Patricia Chavez;

Note: on the bright side, these are not major media outlets in the sense of television or cable, or large newspapers communicating a 'significant cultural loss'. And in that sense, Clark's passing has not been noticed. Wikipedia, by the way, has an entry for her that seems very N.D. sympathetic, whereby again Pizzorno is cited for his expert opinion regarding physiology [ha!] and the article states Clark "held a naturopathy degree from the Clayton College of Natural Health, a school that lacks accreditation from any accreditation agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education."

Danger! The USDE, whom I've written to many times, has done nothing about the 'naturopathy education racket': as I have often written, there are MANY fully-accredited naturopathy schools that are completely bogus in their claims of what actually is scientific and science-based [Pizzorno's Bastyr, my alma mater U.B. -- for starters, check out 'The Education Robbers'].

003. I should also mention that today's North East Conference on Science and Skepticism had a small mention of Clark's harmfulness and passing during the live Skeptics' Guide to the Universe taping. My impression was that the audience was aghast at her activities and that her activities had gone on for so long in supposedly civilized and lawful North America.

Orac Chosen 'The Best Health Policies / Ethics Weblog' of 2008:

The 2008 Medical Weblog Awards have been announced, per:

"Orac of Respectful Insolence has been chosen as the Best Health Policies / Ethics Weblog of 2008. As one of the members of Science Blogs, Orac attempts to bring sanity to the world full of medical quackery. His efforts at exposing the dangers of alternative medicine, pseudoscience, and evolution deniers have made Orac one of the most recognized online activists against medical fraud and pseudoscience."

Here, here.

Dawkins, Orac - On The Nonscientific Status of Vitalism, 2006 & 2008

here, I reference two sources concerning the nonscientific status of vitalism, a famous UK evolutionary biologist and a famous [:)] US surgeon / scientist & blogger from scienceblogs.com:

001. Richard Dawkins writes:

001.a. in "The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing" [ 2008; ISBN 0199216800]:

"what neither Mendel nor anyone else before 1953 knew was that genes themselves are digital, within themselves [...] life is the execution of programs written using a small digital alphabet in a single, universal machine language. This realization was the hammer blow that knocked the last nail in the coffin of vitalism and, by extension, of dualism. The hammer was wielded, with undisguised youthful relish, by James Watson and Francis Crick [p.030...] for me, the greatest achievement of Watson and Crick was to turn genetics from a branch of wet and squishy physiology into a branch of information technology, in the process slaying, as I suggested above, the ghost of vitalism [p.226]."

Note: so, vitalism FINALLY was totally 'not viable' before 1960, in terms of the history of the idea per scientific thought.

001.b. in "The Digital River" from "The Science Book" [2006; ISBN 1841882542]:

"our genetic system [...] there is no spirit-driven life force, no throbbing, heaving, pullulating, protoplasmic, mystic jelly. Life is just bytes and bytes of digital information."

Note: vitalism has NO SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT, yet is claimed as the basis for a supposed medial science at a Connecticut [supposed] University -- right now -- a [supposed] College also centered around a 'supernatural, dualistic' premise, also science unsupported.

002. Orac per Respectful Insolence has written, in "That'll Teach 'Em For Using An Actual Valid Placebo Control" [2008-11-17]:

"I never for a minute considered that the whole rigmarole about 'unblocking' or 'redirecting' the flow of that mystical life force known as qi had anything to do with whether or not acupuncture did or did not have efficacy treating disease or other conditions. That was clearly a holdover from the prescientific medicine times in which most beliefs about the causes of disease involved either the wrath of the gods or vitalism [that is, superstitions!!!], the latter of which is, when you come right down to it, the philosophical basis upon which many 'complementary and alternative' (CAM) modalities are based, especially the so-called 'energy healing' modalities, such as reiki, therapeutic touch, and, of course, acupuncture."

Note: and naturopathy.

003. Are you appalled yet?

Caveat emptor [something I should not have to say about a University program, and about a domain claiming to meet the standards of modern science and medical professionalism].