Epistemology and Vitalism in Acupuncture Today (2011-03)

here, I cite from an article regarding knowledge-type delineation [epistemology] and TCM's essential vitalism [see 001., below]:

001. William Morris writes in Acupuncture Today's "Medical Epistemology: A Bias of Culture?" (2011-03) states:

"for Chinese medicine, the core assumption [the a priori] is vitalism, or qi. This vitalist point of view [...] deleting vitalist language from the lexicon of Chinese medicine is dangerous because it eliminates critical knowledge building tools that lead to specific actions [...] a biomedical epistemology cannot recapture them [...] in essence, there is a need for both scientific and traditional epistemologies with corresponding language in the practice of Chinese medicine and acupuncture."

Note: 

I argue that what is being called for is a blending of knowledge types.  I've termed this "epistemic conflation".   Science is not an epistemic conflation.  Vitalism has been science-ejected, profoundly.  Since a vital force is a figmentation, I'm sure that TCM is based on a kind of knowledge of that same kind.  The scientific epistemology that the author speaks of, I'll hazard to guess, is that small sprinkling of science that furthers this form of sectarian medicine in terms of marketing.  Though, in the end, science demolished TCM as a theoretical system.

Naturopathy is as similarly blended and vitalistic, and science demolished.  What stands the test of scientific scrutiny already exists in some science-domain INDEPENDENT of naturopathy.  An impressive amount of NDs / NMDs carry  LAc. credentials.  They are birds of a feather.

Overall too, I am of a hopeful type.  I believe in an objective universe accessible to all who seek to understand it, once they've taken off their cultural / ideological blinders.  There is not a separate epistemology of the objective for various cultures...that to me is racism.  I do recognize that science is a human endeavor, too. 

AANP's Blog and NMJ Postures 'Myth vs. Fact, Fact vs. Fiction' – So Let Us Too, Pannaturopathically

here, I cite from a recent post at the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [AANP] blog and a release about their journal [see 001., below]; and then I follow their 'myth-fact' model to its logical conclusion [see 002., below]:

001. the AANP writes:

001.a. in the blog post “It’s Time to Bust the Myths About Chocolate” (2011-02-11) by ND Bishop:

“enjoy your chocolate your way, since only you can be the true judge [...after presenting a bunch of] myth [...and] fact [...and the sidebar states]  'Physicians Who Listen' [PWL] is the blog of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) [...a] national professional society  […] naturopathic medicine is based on the belief that the human body has an innate healing ability [IHA; coded vitalism].”

001.b. in "Natural Medicine Journal Helps Clinicians and Patients Sort Fact From Fiction" (2011-01-18):

"the Natural Medicine Journal provides scientifically valid, patient-centered, peer-reviewed health care information to the medical community [...] when it comes to the field of natural medicine, it's not always easy to discern the credible and reliable research from the unsubstantiated claims [(my irony meter has exploded)...] the go-to resource for cutting-edge information [...for] scientifically valid, patient-centered healthcare information [...] to maintain quality of content, clinical articles go through a rigorous peer-review proces [...] 'the discerning eyes of experts' [...] the journal's high-quality content [...an] extensive editorial board [...] many of the foremost leaders in integrative medicine [...published by] Karolyn A. Gazella, in partnership with the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [...] launch[ed] Natural Medicine Journal [...] Tina Kaczor, ND,  FABNO [is] the journal's medical editor."

002. let's decode IHA and see where it stands in relation to science:

002.a. IHA is the concept of vitalism, if you look at naturopathy preponderantly:

I'm not sure how a group can be professional if they can't be transparent about their essential sectarian belief / figmentation.

Note: you'll notice that naturopathy claims that that life force is “in fact”.

002.b. vitalism is hugely science-ejected, in fact:

so, in naturopathyland, facts and myths / fictions are conflated.  Yet, they'll pretend they delineate at their convenience, as with that PWL post.  I'm not sure how a group can be professional if their essential claims are false and their mannerisms are so opaque

In such a context of knowledge conflation, I find the NMJ's language preposterous.

ND ______ - 'We're Science, I Mean Nonscience, I Mean Science...These Different Things Are the Same Things'

here, I employ a few North American ND / NMD sources' claims about the context of naturopathy to illustrate the 'epistemic and ontological conflation' of the whole nonsensical muddle:

001. a few ND sources:

Canadian alternating with American -- who claim "science" as the overarching category or methodology of naturopathy [the '#a' parts] and simultaneously claim nonscience / the preponderantly science-ejected as the category or mechanism of naturopathy [the '#b' parts]:

001.a. Canada nationally: the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors states:

001.a1. in "May 4-11, 2008 - Naturopathic Medicine Week" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends modern scientific knowledge with traditional and natural forms of medicine. Naturopathic doctors diagnose, treat, and prevent disease using natural therapies including botanical medicine, clinical nutrition, hydrotherapy, homeopathy, naturopathic manipulation, traditional Chinese medicine / acupuncture, and lifestyle counseling. Naturopathic doctors are primary health care providers with 7 years post-secondary education that practice safe, effective, science-based natural health care."

Note: so science [a distinct kind of knowledge], it is claimed, and: while distinct blended yet distinct...and natural [with within that the supernatural; more on that with Pizzorno towards the end].  Loving it.

001.a2. in "Natural Therapies" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

"naturopathic therapies are all based on the same principles [...] assist[ing] the body's healing response [coded vitalism...e.g.] homeopathic remedies [...] when carefully matched to the patient [...] affect the body's 'vital force' [science-ejected vitalism...stimulating] the body's innate healing forces [coded vitalism...e.g.] the key principle that defines and connects all of Chinese medicine is that of chi or vital energy [science-ejected vitalism...] the chi of the body's organs and systems are all connected in [imaginary!!!] 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: so the science-ejected concept of vitalism, explicitly stated and in a couple of guises.  Yes, this is the NATIONAL Canadian naturopathy organization stating that science is nonscience, basically.  And, no disclaimer that their 'philosophy' / logic is nonsensical at its core.  But, they do like to label their irrational and absurd domain "professional" [vsc 2011-01-21].

Though I'll highlight naturopathy vitalism in the '#b' sections of this post, do keep in mind that under the overarching science label that naturopathy uses is also explicit supernaturalism and coded vitalism.

E.g., CAND states in "Guiding Principles" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

"naturopathic doctors are guided by six principles [...] emphasized throughout a naturopathic doctor's training [making it ESSENTIAL...which] forms the foundation of this distinct form of health care [...#2] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [coded vitalism, how distinct]: your naturopathic doctor works to restore and support the powerful and inherent healing ability [coded vitalism] of your body, mind and spirit [supernaturalism...] naturopathic doctors identify and remove obstacles to recovery, facilitating and augmenting this ordered and intelligent healing ability [coded vitalism...#4] in treating the cause of any condition your naturopathic doctor takes into account not only your physical symptoms, but also mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, social, spiritual [supernaturalism] and other factors."

So, therein, naturopathy 'thinks' within this essential mode: the distinct is the coded / opaque, the natural is the supernatural, and taken along with the science claims, the scientific contains the science-exterior.  Fascinating, bizarre.  Where ever else have you seen supposed / self-claimed professionals, on a national level, being so irrational, absurd, and employing an explanatory approach to the public that is SO OPAQUE?

001.b. US nationally: the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians states:

001.b1. in "Naturopathic Principles and Philosophy" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

"naturopathic medicine is [...a] science [...] 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."

Note: so, science and able to survive scientific scrutiny and objective.  But, since when is the sectarian-figmentatious vitalistic [and supernatural!] such?  And "philosophy"?  Philosophy means the love of wisdom.  Irrationalism and absurdity and downright manipulative falseness are not wise.  And you shouldn't love such, or abide it! IMHO.

001.b2. in "Letting Nature Heal" (2009-08-11) [vsc 2010-05-10], the AANP's blog:

"[per ND Schor] is not our goal supposed to be to stimulate the vital force or the vis medicatrix naturae [there's that all-important equation that CAND didn't offer...aka] stimulating the vis [...] the vis medicatrix naturae [...] the healing power of nature [...] let me quote a respected medical writer on nature’s healing properties [...Hahnemann!] 'what the vital force does in these so-called crises and how it does it remains a mystery to us like all the internal operations of the organic vital economy' [yeah, that's admirable]."

Note: Schor was the AANP's first recipient of their Vis Award [yes, they have a vitalism award].

He tells us at his own web page "The Vis Award" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

"at the 2008 annual convention of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians, Dr. Jacob Schor was both surprised and honored by his colleagues as the first recipient of the Vis Award [...] this award was created to honor those naturopathic doctors who have [...a] commitment to living and practicing naturopathic medicine in accordance to what is called the 'vis medicatrix naturae' or healing force of nature [VMN-HFN]. The vis medicatrix naturae, or vis, is one of the fundamental principles that guides and distinguishes the practice of naturopathic medicine [it's essential!!!]. The Vis is the belief [yes, this is a belief system though they deny this to legislators] that every living being contains a 'life force'. When this force is given proper building blocks and freed from obstacles, each being will come to a state of ideal health and balance."

So, the science-ejected sectarian vitalism belief is essential to naturopathy galore.  VMN-HFN is the distinguishing principle of naturopathy that they so often refuse to be distinct about!  They'd rather use a false label.  It's better for commerce / trade.

Being opaque about that principle is actually coded into their ethical code.  And when I say coded, I really mean it [per the Quebec Association of Naturopathic Medicine; their vitalism just stated as "the self-healing power of nature inherent in each individual human being". No "life force", "vital force" or "qi / chi" etc. Along with a bunch of supposed ethical requirements that naturopathy can't fulfill -- as even that web page illustrates -- like "will recognize a responsibility to give the generally held opinions of the profession when interpreting knowledge of a scientific nature to the public"; QANM can't even transparently communicate that vitalism in "What is Naturopathic Medicine?"  yet we're told on the same page "naturopathic medicine [...] seeks to promote health through education and the scientific use of natural therapeutics" (vsc 2011-01-21)]. Amazing.

001.c. Canada provincially: the British Columbia Naturopathic Association states:

 

001.c1. in "About Naturopathic Medicine -- The Nature of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-12-22]:

 

"naturopathic medicine is science based natural medicine [...built upon upon] a science-based platform [...that there's an abundance of evidence concerning] the scientific basis and validity of naturopathic protocols [...and speaks of] naturopathic scientific journals."

 

Note: science.

 

001.c2. in "Sharon Gurm, ND" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"Dr. Gurm believes strongly in the body’s innate ability to heal itself. By working with the vital force of the individual using a holistic approach, true healing and optimal health can be achieved."

 

Note: vitalism.

 

001.d. US state-wise: the New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians states:

 

001.d1. in "Links - Schools" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"fully accredited naturopathic medical colleges & universities [...include] Bastyr University: Natural Health Sciences."

 

Note: science.  NYANP links up to the AANMC [which covers all North American AANP-type schools]], which states in "Academic Curriculum" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"naturopathic medicine students [...] attend four-year graduate-level programs at accredited institutions, where they are educated in the same biomedical sciences as allopathic physicians [a false sectarian label!; and they don't mention that this 'sames science includes the science-exterior]. 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 [the super-science claim!]. Students of naturopathic medicine use the Western medical sciences as a foundation [so they 'found' the science-exterior with science]."  What a trip.

 

001.d2. in "Naturopathy" [at archive.org, vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"naturopathic medicine encourages the self-healing process, the vis medicatrix naturae [coded vitalism...] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [coded vitalism] naturopathic medicine recognizes in the body an inherent ability, which is ordered and intelligent. Naturopathic doctors identify and remove obstacles to recovery and facilitate and augment this healing ability [coded vitalism...] homeopathic medicine. This powerful system of medicine is more than 200 years old and is widely accepted in many countries. Homeopathic medicines, when properly prescribed, affect the body’s 'vital force' and strengthen its innate ability to heal."

Note: vitalism.  The NYANP explicit vitalism that NYANP has now apparently expunged -- furthering NYANP's licensure cause by hiding what naturopathy essentially is?

 

001.e. Canada ND-wise: Ontario's Shahram Ayoubzadeh, N.D. states:

 

001.e1. in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"naturopathic medicine [...] is an art and science of disease diagnosis, therapy, and prevention [...] to be registered as an N.D., one must have successfully completely a four-year program at an accredited college of naturopathic medicine. Before that, one must first complete three years of premedical sciences at the university undergraduate level. Chiropractors and medical doctors must also complete these three years of premedical sciences before they are eligible to apply to their respective programs [...] the first two years of the four-year program focus on basic medical sciences and diagnosis."

 

Note: science.

 

001.e.2. in "Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"the very nature of homeopathic remedies is integrated, working harmoniously and directly on the vital force instead of merely on the physiological body [...] conventional medicine has its place in health therapy when there is irreversible structural damage or when the manifestation of the disease has compromised an individual's health to the extent that the vital force is no longer capable of stimulating a viable curative response."

 

Note: vitalism.

 

001.f. US ND-wise: the practice of NDs Phillips, Stretch, Celmer, Oberg, Karp, Risley, Deichert, Aschtgen states:

 

001.f1. in "About Our Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are based on objective observation of the nature of health and disease [...] the naturopathic medical education consists of 2 years of basic science classes."

 

Note: objectivity, science.

 

001.f2. in "About Our Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-21]:

 

"homeopathy stimulates the body's vitality [...] homeopathy is a system that is encourages the body to heal itself, stimulating the body's vitality to initiate healing [...] treatment with NMT produces a physical 'release' which can encourage metabolic function, stimulate vital energies [...] TCM is based on the Chinese concept of 'qi' (pronounced 'chee' and usually translated as 'vital energy') and the theory of 'yin and yang' (the harmony of all the opposite elements and forces that make  up existence). Qi flows through the body in channels, called meridians."

 

Note: yes, that is the same web page that claimed objectivity and science claiming sectarian vitalistic-figmentation.  The ultimate of equations.

 

001.g. Canada school-wise: the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine states:

 

001.g1. in "Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2009-12-15 from Google.com's cache]:

 

"naturopathic medicine is science-based, holistic philosophy and practice rooted in the principle of vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature [coded vitalism...] the first two years of study, include the foundation medical sciences [...] for those applicants whose academic background does not include the sciences, CCNM offers a naturopathic college preparatory program."

 

Note: science.

 

001.g2. in "Healing Arthritis" [vsc 2011-01-21 from archive.org]:

 

"the Robert Schad Naturopathic Clinic located at the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] NDs address the underlying cause(s) of [...] rheumatoid arthritis (RA) [...and] osteoarthritis (OA) [...via] traditional Chinese medicine: TCM is used by NDs to help balance qi (energy flow) to reduce illness and promote health. Interventions include acupuncture, acupressure and Asian herbs and foods. Homeopathic medicine: NDs use diluted doses of natural substances (plants, animals and minerals) to stimulate the body’s vital force and promote self-healing."

 

Note: vitalism.

 

001.h. US school-wise: the National University of Health Sciences states:

 

001.h1. it's name says it all.

 

Note: science.

 

001.h2. in "Bulletin 2009-2010" [2009-2010 Bulletin] [vsc 2010-08-28]:

 

"NT5110N Foundations of Naturopathic Medicine I [...] this course forms the basis of the clinical theory stream of courses in the ND program, which serves as a framework for practice. The course begins with an overview and the vision and ultimate goals of the ND program. The naturopathic principles are discussed at length. Major concepts such as health, holism, and vitalism [...] spirituality and its importance to life and healing, and the need for the physicians to be whole themselves, form the concluding portion of the course."

Note: vitalism, supernaturalism.

002. on 'epistemic and ontological conflation':

 

'epistemic conflation' is a term I invented some-what, I'll admit.  Perhaps it's the word 'pseudoscience' in a tuxedo.  I think it's pretty accurate.  Epistemology is the study of knowledge-type, roughly.  There is all knowledge and subsets of that group.  Within that entirety are the subsets science and nonscience, and a whole bunch of other kinds of knowledge.

 

also within knowledge is the science-ejected.  It is exceptionally absurd for naturopathy to categorically claim a context of science upon the HUGELY science-ejected.  Naturopathy is claiming two locations for the same thing, when they are mutually exclusive / different locations.  

 

in doing so, overall about the 'essentially naturopathic', naturopathyland is claiming that distinctions in knowledge-type are not possible for distinctions already PROFOUNDLY preponderant.

 

not only is science and nonscience blended / conflated i.e. 'epistemic conflation', they are then labeled the nonblended knowledge type known as science.  And that is quite irrational and absurd.  Because money changes hands, it is also a matter of false trade.

 

perhaps their horseshit words say it best: naturopathy blends yet is distinct, NDs are generalists who specialize, the profoundly / essentially science-ejected is able to survive scientific scrutiny.

ontological conflation comes into play once things are so indistinct / equated / simultaneous / irrational.

 

 with ontology the study of 'being', the 'being' / boundaries so to speak or properties of things, built from a position of epistemic conflation, then hugely blur.

i'll use ND Pizzorno as an example of the outcome of this blending / conflating / integrating mode.

in his book "Total Wellness", he tells us that one of the important systems in the body is the "life force" akin to "spirit" and overall that naturopathy is "science-based" and "natural".

how much more conflated and illogical can you be [once you know them from the inside, that is]?

vitalism and supernaturalism are science-exterior and the science-exterior is different from the science-interior, the natural and the supernatural are different, body's and spirits are usually considered different.

 

something is not equal to something it is different from.

ND Thomson and Naturopathy's OVERALL Irrationality

here, I briefly logically engage some 'nonsense naturopathy-speak' [NNS]:

001. Thomson, R. (ND NCNM) states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-17]:

"naturopathic medicine blends centuries-old natural therapies (such as herbs, nutrition, and water therapy) with current advances in medical science (like medical imaging, modern biochemistry, and lab testing) [...] naturopathic medicine has been growing steadily in popularity as a source for scientifically-based 'alternative' medicine."

Note: so, we're told that naturopathy is science mixed with nonscience then we're told that naturopathy is science.  Hmmmm: is wine+mud still wine? I don't think so.

Of course, Thomson is an NCNM graduate, a school that states that the scientific and the science ejected are the same thing.

I see a source of knowledge conflation and its progency.

In the land of NNS, wine and wine+mud ARE the same thing.

Beware.

Kansas Naturopathic Medicine - KSBHA Falsely Poses What's Science-Ejected As Science

here, I cite from the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts [KSBHA] which absurdly labels naturopathy's homeopathy "clinical science" [see 001., below]; then, I muse on 'what such pseudoscience-by-legislation accomplishes' [see 002., below]:

001. the KSBHA states in "Kansas Statutes Annotated and Kansas Administrative Regulations Relating to the Practice of Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-11-26]:

"the board shall issue a registration as a naturopathic doctor to an individual who prior to the effective date of this act (1) graduated from a school of naturopathy that required four years of attendance and was at the time of such individual’s graduation accredited or a candidate for accreditation by the board approved accrediting body, (2) passed an examination approved by the board covering appropriate naturopathic subjects including basic and clinical sciences [...] K.A.R .100-72-5. Examinations: (a) Each applicant for registration by examination as a naturopathic doctor shall submit proof of having passed a nationally administered, standardized examination [the NPLEX, essentially] that is approved by the board and consists of written questions and practical questions assessing knowledge and proficiency on subject matter from the following content areas: (1) Basic sciences, including the following: (A) Anatomy; (B) biochemistry; (C) microbiology; (D) pathology; and (E) physiology; and (2) clinical sciences, including the following: (A) Emergency medicine and public health; (B) laboratory diagnosis and diagnostic imaging; (C) botanical medicine; (D) clinical nutrition; (E) physical and clinical diagnosis; (F) physical medicine; (G) psychology; (H) counseling; (I) ethics; and (J) homeopathy."

Note: so, an accredited school requiring basic and clinical sciences.  Wow, knowing what I know about 'the essentially naturopathic'.  Yes, that's right, homeopathy is claimed as SCIENCE.  And ethics too.  We know, and have know for quite some time, that homeopathy is IMPLAUSIBLE.

Edzard Ernst recently said it best in "Homeopathy, Non-Specific Effects and Good Medicine" (2010-11-13):

"in this issue, Brien et al. report the findings of a five-armed randomized controlled trial, which was aimed at differentiating between the effects of homeopathic remedies and patient consultations. The authors demonstrate that homeopathic remedies are placebos and show that 'the benefits of homeopathy are attributable to the consultation' [...] homeopathic remedies [...] are biologically implausible, and the 150 published trials collectively fail to indicate clinical effectiveness [...yes,] patients benefit from a long and empathic encounter with a homeopath but not from the remedy [...yes,] the effective element is not specifically homeopathy but the therapeutic relationship in general [...so, overall] homeopathic remedies are ineffective and empathetic therapeutic encounters are helpful [...] we should discard the ineffective and adopt the helpful. If we do this, we must tell our patients that homeopathic remedies are both implausible and ineffective. Thus, they cannot be recommended."

That's right, what KSBHA states is a clinical science hasn't ever been shown to be effective, and is considered implausible.  That amounts to being science-ejected.  The label upon naturopathy's homeopathy by KSBHA is false.

002. pseudoscience-by-legislation: what does naturopathy's false-labeling of what's science-ejected as "science" accomplish?

I've fashioned the term "epistemic conflation" [akin to pseudoscience, but encompassing more so the Franken-build of legitimate science and nonscience knowledge amalgamation so typical of naturopathy] to put an handle on naturopathy's M.O.   What naturopathy does is study some science content [e.g., 'basic medical science' and 'regular clinical medicine'], some nonscience content [the essentially naturopathic, sCAM woo-things] and combines the two areas under the umbrella term "science."  But, this is logically false.  Scientific knowledge is a specific kind of knowledge, and the other stuff is not scientific knowledge.  To blend knowledge kinds and falsely label it unblended is madness.

  Naturopathy's 'back-end' in all this misrepresentation is simply this: it's great marketing.  I see it also as unfair trade, and a violation of the professional ethos of informed consent.

It's also efficient: instead of doing actual science, or merely keeping up with the scientific literature and gutting from naturopathy 'that-which-is-archaic-junk', a little pdf document and a few lines of legislation are all that's needed to get on the commerce gravy train.

Now, lets be as expansive as possible: this epistemic conflation and false labeling of homeopathy as science happens across all of North America [NA; I'll exclude Mexico], not just in Kansas.  NPLEX, the licensure exam for NA naturopathy, clearly claims homeopathy as "science."

And this is why Naturocrit exists: to at least be a small voice countering this madness.  The naturopathic racket continues, even after all these years of continually publicly alerting State, Federal, and Provincial authorities.

AANP's Natural Medicine Journal: Naturopathic / Holistic "Spiritual Science" Epistemic Conflation Nonsense

here, I offer an example of 'the essentially naturopathic nonsensical', such oxymoronic labelings as "spiritual science" in the AANP's Natural Medicine Journal [NMJ; see 001., below]:

001. NMJ's Freedenberg, R. (ND NECNM[IL]) states in "Naturopathic / Holistic Treatment of Mild to Moderate Depression" (2009-10)[vsc 2010-10-05]:

"[the] following are a number of evidence-based, effective alternative / naturopathic treatments [...e.g.] anthroposophic medicine [...which] is a spiritual science [...which] use[s] medicines based on homeopathic principles [(lovely)...and] uses the anthroposophic view of the human being as a blend of three interdependent aspects: the physical body; the life force [vitalism], understood as the source of growth and regeneration and sometimes called the soul [supernaturalism]; and the 'astral body,' which mediates between the body and the soul, also called the 'ego' or 'consciousness' [more supernaturalism in the sort of panpsychic / dualistic yet tripartite sense]."

Note: the equation of the holistic and alternative with the naturopathic, and the subset within that of anthroposophic "spiritual science."  That is a nonsense term, like a 'square circle.'  I've termed this error of knowledge blending "epistemic conflation."  It is a hallmark of naturopathy to inappropriately place nonscience and science-ejected matters together, such as supernaturalism and vitalism, and then falsely claim it all is within science.  Notice the immaterial / other-than-physical "life force" / "soul" equation as well.  We have stepped well outside of science and the science-based when we enter the evidenceless faithy-beliefy area of such sectarian models.  Of course, this is all one huge issue of knowledge-type incompetence / callousness.

002. now, NMJ claims, in "Statement of Purpose" [vsc 2010-10-05]:

"the Natural Medicine Journal provides scientifically-valid, patient-centered health care information [...] readers of the journal and visitors to the site will find scientifically-valid, clinically-relevant information."

Note: and here's a link to their editorial board members.

003. but, of course, the science-ejected and science-unsupported is not in any way scientifically valid / within science [that's irrational]:

Basically, what's happening is that types of knowledge are being blended, then mislabeled as one type of knowledge.

You can get a sense of that from naturopathy's own definition, wherein they state, and I use Canada's NSAND site as an example per "What is a Naturopathic Doctor?" [vsc 2010-10-05]:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends [...and] cooperate[s] with other branches of medical science."

Legitimate science, though, is not also nonscience just as a square and a circle are not the same.

But, naturopathy is NUTS LIKE THAT!  Something is defined as equal to what it isn't: the utmost reversal of values.

Naturopathy's Essential Science-Ejected Vitalism via ND Tara Johnie Shelby

here, I cite an ND's expressed vitalistic and supernatural premises [which are science-ejected!]:

001. Shelby, T.J. (ND Bastyr 2008) states in "Tara Johnie Shelby, ND, LM" [vsc 2010-09-15]:

001.a. naturopathy's vitalism per:

"naturopathic principles: [#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae).  The healing power of nature is the inherent self-organizing and healing process of living systems. Naturopathic medicine recognizes this healing process to be ordered and intelligent [teleological!]. It is the naturopathic physician's role to support, facilitate and augment this process [...and now comes the contextualization] naturopathic therapeutic order: stimulate the vis medicatrix naturae [...aka] 'qi', 'prana', 'life force' [...] the force that moves us towards health; it is the essence that invigorates us. Some modalities that we utilize to stimulate the 'vis' include hydrotherapy, exercise, yoga, mediation, craniosacral therapy, energy medicine and homeopathy [powerful stuff!]."

Note: and, of course, the ND speaks of the "science-based nature of the medicine [...having] studied the medical science [...having] knowledge in conventional medical sciences [...and reveals] these principles, along with the medical science, are what guides my own medical practice today."  Bastyr itself, her alma mater, is well-know for this nonsense statement: "Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature [yes, supernaturalism and vitalism]."  

Yes, the cultic thought of naturopathy claims that within science is nonscience.

002. of course, though vitalism is science-ejected and defines naturopathy / naturopathy couches itself in the science-ejected, it falsely labels its entirety "science."  

Shelby also falsely places supernaturalism within "science" on the above web page. We're told by the ND: 

"my tools range from herbs, nutrition, homeopathy, physical manipulation, supplementation, awakening one's spirit as well as pharmaceuticals and surgery [!!!...and per naturopathy's defining principles, #4] health or disease comes from a complex interaction of mental, emotional, spiritual, physical etc."

So, I reiterate my overall label: 

"the epistemic conflation of a school of thought claiming to be scientific / the science that ain't science."

Would one want SURGERY if the surgeon cannot tell the difference between a scientific fact / concept and a sectarian figmentation / delusion / fallacy?

Not me.

UB's New ND Description (2010) - What They Don't Tell You

here, I analyze the language of the University of Bridgeport's [UB] 2010 description of their N.D. program that's offered by their College of Naturopathic Medicine within their Division of Health Sciences [see 001., below]; then I provide some ACTUAL detail / elucidation [see 002., below]:

001. UB states in "Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.): Program Details" [vsc 2010-08-29]:

"are you interested in a career in a field of medicine that works to support the natural healing power [NHP, coded vitalism] of the body, mind, and spirit [BMS, supernaturalism]? In naturopathic medicine we call this vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature) [therein VMN-HPN is an amalgam of vitalism and spiritism, minimally], and it is our guiding philosophy [required sectarian central belief / standard of naturopathic practice].

are you interested in a profession [professions claim] that serves humanity [!] with both ancient tradition and modern science [aka blended knowledge...] we embrace the old and the new [...] this blend of old and new [...] modern biomedical science and diagnosis [...blended with archaic] philosophies and healing modalities [...which is] the medicine required to meet the challenge of the twenty-first century [!...]

the College of Naturopathic Medicine at the University of Bridgeport [...offers] a program of professional education [again, that professions claim] to prepare naturopathic physicians to provide compassionate healthcare that addresses the cause of disease [again, that VMN-HPN framing...]

the course of study is rigorous [!] as is appropriate [!] for the training of physicians [...]

the College of Naturopathic Medicine trains naturopathic physicians who practice medicine in a way that supports the inherent healing wisdom of nature [coded vitalism...] preparing them to become leaders in natural healthcare [naturopathy's false naturalistic language...]

the College provides an education of the highest standards [high standard claim], with academic and clinical training based on the principles and philosophy of naturopathic medicine [their sectarian belief amalgam framing...]

students are also encouraged to become honorable and dedicated professionals [again, professions claim], committed to serve their communities and the naturopathic profession [again, professions claim...]

the College conducts research to advance the understanding and knowledge of the natural health sciences [their overarching label for all this...]

the College of Naturopathic Medicine is accredited by the Connecticut State Department of Higher Education to offer the degree of Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine [...and] the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education (CNME), which is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education [their accomplices in all this absurdity]."

Note: yes, the word "details" was used.  But, why then do I have to elaborate, comment and elucidate?  But, I must, to provide detail / transparency.

002. elucidation regarding:

NHP / HPN-VMN [the naturopathic vitalism that dare not speak its science-ejected life force status!]: this is, preponderantly, a coding / camouflage for naturopathy's central belief in vitalism.  Here's my collection of such [including earlier UB pages that used "life force" in earlier VMN definitions] stated by naturopathy explicitly in other places.  Often naturopathy does not explain that VMN is an article of faith most akin to supernatural spiritism, wherein the body is governed by a 'life spirit' or 'life force' which is intelligent / purposeful.  I have often described this amalgam as 'purposeful life spirit' and that encompasses the concepts of vitalism, spiritism, and teleology.  In modern times, naturalism is not supernaturalism, but, herein, naturopathy labels supernaturalism with naturalistic language -- which is quite misleading and FALSE [also note that vitalism is quite science-ejected minimally for several decades].  The public is not informed of this material fact;

BMS [the science-ejected supernatuaralism that speaks volumes concerning naturopathy's pseudoscientific / 'epistemic conflation' status]: you will notice that the program is offered within the label of science, and here we have explicit supernaturalism, which is science-exterior and has been for hundreds of years [ah, the absurdity!].  The public is not informed of this material fact;

"profession": what kind of profession opaquely DECEIVES and engages in such transparent MANIPULATION?;

blended knowledge falsely labeled a specific kind of knowledge "rigorous" / "appropriate":  who needs such?  This is going to be good?  You will notice that THE hallmark of naturopathy is to study some science, study a bunch of nonscience, and then falsely label the whole muddle as science. And they diagnose and treat disease.  It is akin to a Ouija board and a laboratory test being equated, and then falsely labeled as both being scientific instruments.  Here's a great anecdote: I had an ND instructor at UB who diagnosed patients with a pendulum.  That's the knowledge conflation in a nutshell: science blended with nonscience and it all called science with the ND unable to distinguish because the blending has been done so thoroughly.

"natural health sciences": this is a false label, simply put.  The essential supernaturalism and vitalism alone knock naturopathy out of this category;

the accomplices: a very large number of local, state, and national persons and entities are as responsible for this nonsense as the immediate purveyors.