Naturopathic Doctor

[Flame219]

I think treating everything with an open mind gets tiresome when there is no tangible reason to. I recall the Cochrane Collaboration report on naturopathy concluded it was no better than placebo. Just because somebody desires naturopathy doesn't change the fact that it is unproven, potentially unsafe, and at best a waste of money in a lot of circumstances.

 

Of course, I'm not arguing for naturopathy. Thing is, there ARE tangible reasons to keep an open mind about something we don't fully understand. (naturopathy or not naturopathy) Like in my previous posts, naturopathy makes use and borrows different techniques from several different "alternative" approaches to medicine (heck, they even tried to invade our turf!) We believe in black holes and even dark energies and we dismiss ALL techniques from naturopathy as BS?? How could science advance? While homeopathy, hand healing, iridology just sounds dumb and nonsense, what about TCMs? Accupuncture? Physiatry? Hey, that's our stuff!

 

While I DO NOT think that naturopathic doctors should be allowed to practice in health care because of their inherent harm to the public, when you break their methods into sizable bits, some of the techniques might prove useful and should be subject to tests/RCTs, not downright rejection.

[AndrewB]

Of course, I'm not arguing for naturopathy. Thing is, there ARE tangible reasons to keep an open mind about something we don't fully understand. (naturopathy or not naturopathy) Like in my previous posts, naturopathy makes use and borrows different techniques from several different "alternative" approaches to medicine (heck, they even tried to invade our turf!) We believe in black holes and even dark energies and we dismiss ALL techniques from naturopathy as BS?? How could science advance? While homeopathy, hand healing, iridology just sounds dumb and nonsense, what about TCMs? Accupuncture? Physiatry? Hey, that's our stuff!

 

While I DO NOT think that naturopathic doctors should be allowed to practice in health care because of their inherent harm to the public, when you break their methods into sizable bits, some of the techniques might prove useful and should be subject to tests/RCTs, not downright rejection.

 

I understand your perspective and I'm not arguing against it. Of course there might be phenomenon out there in the naturopathic world that may work and haven't been scientifically studied. I was just trying to make a point that our, for a lack of a better word, "politically correct" tolerance of dubious naturopathic practices is stupid. I don't think that all naturopathic medicine is quackery, just the vast majority of it.