- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
Yes, but do these same chiropractors have representation on the medical board? I think that is also a central issue here as people are stating, since NDs will be on the osteopathic medical board.
California to Merge Naturopathic Board with DO Board
- Thread starter SDN
- Start date
Yes, but do these same chiropractors have representation on the medical board? I think that is also a central issue here as people are stating, since NDs will be on the osteopathic medical board.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Exactly. Why in the WORLLD should NDs have ANYTHING to say about DO licensing?? Ever????
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 0
This is not a topic to be taken lightly by any means. I thought the stigma about DO's was so irrelevant and only exists in the undergraduate community, but this gets me a little worried.
Supporters of naturopathic medicine (at least the ones I speak to) believe naturopathy and modern medicine should complement each other and be used sided by side. Let's not kid our selves here, naturopathy is the enemy of modern medicine in my opinion. When an ND tells a client to skip chemotherapy and treat lymphoma by restricting the diet and taking supplements concocted by the ND in her own home made with plants grown in her basement (that she sells for $50 a bottle), how can one associate the two professions?
A previous poster was right, this just adds to the public confusion over the identity of DO's. (This shouldn't become a discussion about the wackyness of CA, a state is a state.)
Edit: this naturopath did not obtain her ND from and accredited school, and practices in an unlicensed state. No wonder. This ND gives all naturopaths a bad name and skewed my perception.
Supporters of naturopathic medicine (at least the ones I speak to) believe naturopathy and modern medicine should complement each other and be used sided by side. Let's not kid our selves here, naturopathy is the enemy of modern medicine in my opinion. When an ND tells a client to skip chemotherapy and treat lymphoma by restricting the diet and taking supplements concocted by the ND in her own home made with plants grown in her basement (that she sells for $50 a bottle), how can one associate the two professions?
A previous poster was right, this just adds to the public confusion over the identity of DO's. (This shouldn't become a discussion about the wackyness of CA, a state is a state.)
Edit: this naturopath did not obtain her ND from and accredited school, and practices in an unlicensed state. No wonder. This ND gives all naturopaths a bad name and skewed my perception.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,581
- Reaction score
- 11
This is a grossly inaccurate, uninformed view of NDs. No wonder you think NDs are "the enemy of modern medicine".
Re: cancer care, NDs favor integrative care of cancer patients. Here's a book you might find informative (given your apparent knowledge level):
http://www.amazon.com/Alternative-M...=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248649421&sr=8-7
Here's another:
http://www.amazon.com/Prevent-Treat-Cancer-Natural-Medicine/dp/1573223433/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b#
These authors (NDs) don't advocate ignoring medical cancer care, as you suggest.
The Cancer Treatment Centers of America integrate NDs into treatment plans, so it can't be too wacky.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Okay, great. Should they still have any say in how over 5,000 physicians are licensed in CA???????
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,581
- Reaction score
- 11
Virginia is one state where DCs are regulated by the medical board. Yes, there is one DC on the Board (the same number as DOs), along with a podiatrist and a few lawyers:
http://www.dhp.state.va.us/medicine/medicine_board.htm
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,581
- Reaction score
- 11
DOs have unrestricted licenses. NDs have restricted licenses. Therefore, NDs will not be making medical decisions outside their scope of practice. As such, they won't suddenly be bossing the DOs of California around.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
Thank you for posting this. I also think that naturopathy has a LOT to offer, as I have very much benefited from it personally. A lot of people here make uninformed remarks while knowing very little. Many people are concerned about the toxic side effects of their medicines, and are seeking safer options. I don't blame them, as I have sought the same myself. The problem is that most MDs and DOs have very little knowledge of nutrition, herbs, supplements etc - so it's no wonder others are coming in to fill in the gaps.
That being said, as much as I appreciate 'natural' alternatives, I am concerned about the training in naturopathic schools. I have a deeper insight into this since I previously applied and was accepted to a naturopathic school. I talked to many NDs and also professors of mine to get a better understanding of what I was getting into. The poor clinical training and willingness to espouse non-evidence based medicine frightened me... which caused me to back out and apply to MD and DO schools instead. Now that I am matriculating into a DO school in 2 weeks, I am concerned I may encounter some similar issues with the lack of evidence-based study of osteopathy, but that remains to be seen.
For those of you who aren't aware of accredited naturopathic school curriculums, they also have basic sciences, gross anatomy with cadavers etc. They also have clinical rotations in several areas of medicine, and have to take board exams. Also since the time I applied, schools have been improving their clinical education by increasing student access to community outreach clinics for their rotations. Check out one school's curriculum here.... http://scnm.edu/nd-degrees/program-of-study.php
I wouldn't be surprised someday if ND schools become third viable route to becoming a physician, besides the MD/DO. Right now, I am still concerned that the education isn't up to snuff (especially with no required residency training) and only 1,000 clinical hours during school, but that doesn't mean that someday it won't be much stronger. Right now I am still concerned about NDs acting as primary care physicians, but someday that concern may be unfounded... who knows.
I am dismissive of the idea of naturopathy being the enemy of modern medicine, because I don't think our goal as physicians or future physicians is to promote modern medicine - but rather see what is best for the patient. If patients can improve their health by lifestyle changes and not taking drugs - all the power to them! Due to my own interest in this area, I plan to take coursework in naturopathy and integrative medicine in the future - either at ND schools (if they don't view me as a traitor and let me back in, even though I don't support NDs as full primary care physicians) or at integrative medicine programs for MDs/DOs. I don't think this is irresponsible at all. With the whole supplement/nutraceutical industry, we NEED people who have a better understanding of the interaction of pharmaceuticals and herbal supplements etc.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 0
A naturopath in my community who obtained her ND from Trinity School of Natural health, has repeatedly done what I described in my post. That is where I obtained my viewpoint of ND's from, and I apologize if this is a narrow minded view. This person took online courses and attended a few seminars and obtained an ND. I assume and hope this is not the norm. Although there are other more qualified ND's out there with more extensive training, I doubt she is the only one of her kind. She is minimally trained, and is still has an ND! She refers to herself as Dr. So and So. Perhaps there is no licensure board in my state, enabling her to "practice" naturopathy and deceive her clients, and in the process endanger their lives, in my opinion. This is a pretty big loophole in the system.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
This is a major reason that NDs of accredited schools have been fighting for licensing.... as there are 2 types of NDs, those from accredited schools and those who are not. In licensed states, only graduates from accredited ND schools are allowed to use the 'ND' title; however, in unlicensed states, anybody from a mail-order diploma mill school can use that title. The school you mention here is not accredited. Obviously a school where you take classes online has no comparison to an accredited school where you have anatomy with cadavers and have clinical and community rotations actually seeing patients.
Right now the two dissenting groups are the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) and the American Naturopathic Medical Association (ANMA). The AANP oversees the accredited schools and wants licensure to be only for their graduates. The ANMA has members from the diploma mill schools (as well as some MD and DOs who also use the ND title without going to an accredited ND school) and obviously opposes licensure of NDs as that would put their members in a pinch. The AANP may possibly be seen as more threatening to the MD/DO community since the graduates from the accredited schools are the ones going around calling themselves physicians and acting the PCP role. However, the higher standards of education from accredited schools is much better for the public safety (assuming that the naturopaths weren't misrepresenting themselves as physicians). The internal conflict between these 2 groups has held back the naturopathic profession from expanding scope of practice; however, it seems these groups are starting to get friendlier and are starting to join together more through joint conferences etc.
And by the way, don't think that only NDs sell those supplements. I have a Harvard and Hopkins-trained MD acquaintance who runs a cash-only practice out of her own home, and sells all kinds of those supplements as well. She happens to be a great doc though, as she has a solid medical training with a passion for natural treatment options.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
No problem, glad to share my knowledge. I was actually debating one of my own points I mentioned earlier about the licensed NDs being better for public safety, as that may or may not be the case. Graduates of accredited schools may have much more medical knowledge as they study pharmacology and have curriculums much more similar to actual medical schools. However, since some of these graduates choose to misrepresent themselves as full physicians (see example here: http://www.dermahealthinstitute.com/catalog/about_us.php), that may not be good at all for public safety. Here is another good commentary on the issue that came out last month: http://www.getbetterhealth.com/is-it-safe-for-naturopaths-to-prescribe-drugs/2009.06.24
Edit: I just wanted to say that the last article I linked here is rather a scathing attack of naturopaths by a physician. Although my personal experiences in naturopathic clinics have been very positive (and I would NEVER call an ND a 'scam practitioner' since I personally have derived much health improvement which I am very grateful for), I think some of the concerns the author mentions about naturopathic training may be valid. Thus I am not here to criticize naturopathy, but simply to mention concerns related to training.
Edit: I just wanted to say that the last article I linked here is rather a scathing attack of naturopaths by a physician. Although my personal experiences in naturopathic clinics have been very positive (and I would NEVER call an ND a 'scam practitioner' since I personally have derived much health improvement which I am very grateful for), I think some of the concerns the author mentions about naturopathic training may be valid. Thus I am not here to criticize naturopathy, but simply to mention concerns related to training.
Last edited:
Oh wow, that link is just too much. The director of that derm group calls herself a "medical doctor" and "former family physician" and refers to earning her "medical degree"... how on earth can that be legal???
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Yeah, someone brought this up in the derm forum awhile ago. They get away with it - until they get sued, which in cosmetics will happen - because they are in Arizona where NDs have pretty decent rights. Honestly, this is something unfortunate that future doctors have to look forward to ... everyone wanting a piece of the pie without putting in the long, hard work that DOs/MDs put in.
Sad that so many of you sound just like an MD board- DO bashing thread. Noone learns. When reading some of these comments I feel like I am reading an old school MD thoughts.
It is not that I dont understand the frustration with not being seen by the public as having training equivalent to an MD... or how it feels that all of the work that DO's have done to become equal might be threatened even a little bit....
but to bash Naturopathic medicine is in bad taste.
Informed MD's respect DO's. It is as simple as that. Being open-minded when it comes to different perspectives is a strength.
To be open-minded is not to endorse quackary, but rather to remain objective and not be reactionary.
free world just that juvenile( taking on the role of the aggressor) behavior makes me sad.
So hate me if you wish
It is not that I dont understand the frustration with not being seen by the public as having training equivalent to an MD... or how it feels that all of the work that DO's have done to become equal might be threatened even a little bit....
but to bash Naturopathic medicine is in bad taste.
Informed MD's respect DO's. It is as simple as that. Being open-minded when it comes to different perspectives is a strength.
To be open-minded is not to endorse quackary, but rather to remain objective and not be reactionary.
free world just that juvenile( taking on the role of the aggressor) behavior makes me sad.
So hate me if you wish
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Sad that so many of you sound just like an MD board- DO bashing thread. Noone learns. When reading some of these comments I feel like I am reading an old school MD thoughts.
It is not that I dont understand the frustration with not being seen by the public as having training equivalent to an MD... or how it feels that all of the work that DO's have done to become equal might be threatened even a little bit....
but to bash Naturopathic medicine is in bad taste.
Informed MD's respect DO's. It is as simple as that. Being open-minded when it comes to different perspectives is a strength.
To be open-minded is not to endorse quackary, but rather to remain objective and not be reactionary.
free world just that juvenile( taking on the role of the aggressor) behavior makes me sad.
So hate me if you wish
Honestly, this post is incorrect, worthless, and so petty. Please realize that there is a very important, relevant, adult topic at hand. These rants belong elsewhere.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,237
- Reaction score
- 0
Sad that so many of you sound just like an MD board- DO bashing thread. Noone learns. When reading some of these comments I feel like I am reading an old school MD thoughts.
It is not that I dont understand the frustration with not being seen by the public as having training equivalent to an MD... or how it feels that all of the work that DO's have done to become equal might be threatened even a little bit....
but to bash Naturopathic medicine is in bad taste.
Informed MD's respect DO's. It is as simple as that. Being open-minded when it comes to different perspectives is a strength.
To be open-minded is not to endorse quackary, but rather to remain objective and not be reactionary.
free world just that juvenile( taking on the role of the aggressor) behavior makes me sad.
So hate me if you wish
I see your point, but the matter at hand is that there is a HUGE difference between MDs/DOs and NDs. It's not their philosophy, but their actual practice that matters; in that sense they practice a different form of medicine completely and have no basis nor familiarity with modern medicine. They do not have the training that MDs/DOs obtain and are not capable of making the same medical decisions.
However, if NDs were to ever adopt a more rigorous curriculum, with four years of schooling and residency, and include thousands of more hours of clinical training, and create a stable licensing board that ensures that all practitioners of naturopathic medicine came from an accredited institution and has a medical license, THEN you can use your argument that we should be more open to them and not become like the MDs who stigmatized DOs.
This assumes MD's and DO's are equivalent, which they are not.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1999
- Messages
- 12,623
- Reaction score
- 4,102
This is not a discussion of MD v. DO. Please stay on topic.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2007
- Messages
- 6,211
- Reaction score
- 30
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 309
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
Delphine has a point here...this is a quote from naturopathic.org
"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., but also studies holistic and nontoxic approaches to therapy with a strong emphasis on disease prevention and optimizing wellness. In addition to a standard medical curriculum, the naturopathic physician is required to complete four years of training in clinical nutrition, acupuncture, homeopathic medicine, botanical medicine, psychology, and counseling (to encourage people to make lifestyle changes in support of their personal health). A naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams so that he or she may be licensed by a state or jurisdiction as a primary care general practice physician."
Don't be so quick to judge another profession when you probably didn't know much about it to begin with until this debate came up. This does sound exactly like how MD's shunned DOs at first, and in some ways continue to do. But if you guys wanna be really harsh towards these ND's, then let's be harsh. DO education is not the same as MD education in terms of rigor in the basic science years, nor is it as good during the clinical years when you have to rotate at certain hospitals. DO schools generally have a lower quality of student, professor, and choice of clinical rotation site compared to an MD school. So for a DO to now say that an ND is not "good enough" to stand beside them because of their (maybe yet lower) standard of education is hypocritical as a knee jerk reaction.
If NDs are really THAT bad, REAL quacks, then fine, but don't all pretend to be experts on their ability to practice and treat patients. It's a shame more NDs aren't around to defend themselves here.
Maybe they're good enough, maybe not, but the arguments as to why they are not being thrown around here are hypocritical coming from a DO and probably halfway uninformed.
And finallly, lest you forget, this has nothing to do with merging degrees. DOs have nothing to "worry about" because of this change. As another poster pointed out, MD and DO boards have been and are merged in many states already...doesn't seem to affect MDs, nor did it do much to change DO...so not a whole lot is even "at stake" here.
"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., but also studies holistic and nontoxic approaches to therapy with a strong emphasis on disease prevention and optimizing wellness. In addition to a standard medical curriculum, the naturopathic physician is required to complete four years of training in clinical nutrition, acupuncture, homeopathic medicine, botanical medicine, psychology, and counseling (to encourage people to make lifestyle changes in support of their personal health). A naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams so that he or she may be licensed by a state or jurisdiction as a primary care general practice physician."
Don't be so quick to judge another profession when you probably didn't know much about it to begin with until this debate came up. This does sound exactly like how MD's shunned DOs at first, and in some ways continue to do. But if you guys wanna be really harsh towards these ND's, then let's be harsh. DO education is not the same as MD education in terms of rigor in the basic science years, nor is it as good during the clinical years when you have to rotate at certain hospitals. DO schools generally have a lower quality of student, professor, and choice of clinical rotation site compared to an MD school. So for a DO to now say that an ND is not "good enough" to stand beside them because of their (maybe yet lower) standard of education is hypocritical as a knee jerk reaction.
If NDs are really THAT bad, REAL quacks, then fine, but don't all pretend to be experts on their ability to practice and treat patients. It's a shame more NDs aren't around to defend themselves here.
Maybe they're good enough, maybe not, but the arguments as to why they are not being thrown around here are hypocritical coming from a DO and probably halfway uninformed.
And finallly, lest you forget, this has nothing to do with merging degrees. DOs have nothing to "worry about" because of this change. As another poster pointed out, MD and DO boards have been and are merged in many states already...doesn't seem to affect MDs, nor did it do much to change DO...so not a whole lot is even "at stake" here.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Everyone, please ignore FatKid. This thread is too important to waste on MD vs DO bickering, especially bad troll attempts like that. Report all posts your find offensive.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2005
- Messages
- 3,245
- Reaction score
- 138
Not quite true. In some states, like my home state of South Carolina, there is no licensing issue. The practice of Naturopathy is just plain illegal.
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t40c031.htm
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Yes, naturopathic.org makes them look like real physicians. What a shocker there. I'd like to see some of the basic science courses that are equivalent to MD - biochem, histo, etc, and also wondering when I get to take my rigorous botanical medicine and acupuncture classes in med school?? I'd also like to sit for those 'rigorous' boards. It's also a state by state basis about the PCP thing. Come one, be real here ... if this was a third party website, then fine. But it comes from NATUROPATHIC.org.
MDs were right to shun early DOs ... they were NOT the DOs of today. Umm are you kidding me with blanket statements like the highlighted portion??? Go check out a school like PCOM or TCOM and tell me it can't compete with any US Allo school. You may even be lucky enough to talk with one of those lower quality students there. Plus, the day NDs can sit for USMLE and complete ACGME residencies like MDs, then we can talk about merging the boards.
They are fine, it seems like you've got their back ... as an expert that is.
Maybe they're good enough, maybe not. God damn, good enough for me. Who gives a sh'it if patients die right?? I mean, you were cool enough to defend them with your hippy BS because you're annoying, so who cares if they don't have to take real courses, learn real medicine, etc ... maybe they are good enough. Man, I mean ... as long as we are all being feel good and fair. I don't want anyone's feelings to get hurt here ... family members, friends, the general public, sure ... but the feelings of a botanical medicical expert ... oh god no.
You should get off your soapbox and read ... no one is worried about merging the degrees, people are worried about NDs sitting on a board that has influence over DOs licenses in California. No one thinks NDs are going to be rewarded DO degrees or something. Also, MDs and DOs are fully licensed physicians ... NDs are not. No one ... and I repeat, NO ONE on this thread gives a crap if they merge the Osteopathic with the general medical board in California. This is how it is in like 37/50 states or something ... but again bleeding heart, this creates a board of all fully licensed physicians. Not a board comprised of mostly physicians with non-medical professionals on the board.
Next time you have a thought ... just let it go.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Crap ... I just realized that gis or whatever is a troll too. Sweet 11 post history, hard to do that digging. Still mean everything I said ... just going to report all your posts now as well.
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
wow, sounds like you're the one with the issue jaggerplate. Everytime someone disagrees with you, you spit mean-spirited nonconstructive fire at them and basically call them stupid...you're probably the one we should be ignoring...
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2009
- Messages
- 198
- Reaction score
- 3
Considering how often I hear ND's belittling western medicine and endangering patients by encouraging them to avoid seeking necessary medical treatment, I'm pretty speechless over this.
However, being that this IS California we're talking about, I'm not surprised. We've got the biggest bunch of idiots on the planet running this state. I'd rather have a monkey with one of those vibrating pen's writing legislation.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Naturopathy/misrep.html　Interesting read, with references. Sorry my DO colleagues, this really sucks for you
However, being that this IS California we're talking about, I'm not surprised. We've got the biggest bunch of idiots on the planet running this state. I'd rather have a monkey with one of those vibrating pen's writing legislation.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Naturopathy/misrep.html　Interesting read, with references. Sorry my DO colleagues, this really sucks for you
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
Only when they say stupid things ....
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
again with the calling people stupid thing...chill out before people (myself included) start reporting YOUR post.
(and btw, what was with that, you were actually going to REPORT my post above...really man...?)
(and btw, what was with that, you were actually going to REPORT my post above...really man...?)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,237
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2009
- Messages
- 198
- Reaction score
- 3
I think that's going a bit far... people should have the right to seek naturopathic "treatment" if they want to, but I wouldn't argue against SC making it illegal for Naturopaths to call themselves physicians and/or portray themselves as legitimate health professionals.
Edit: Just read it's illegal in Florida and Tennesee, too. LOOOL
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2009
- Messages
- 198
- Reaction score
- 3
I just sent a letter to my local assemblymen. Used faxzero b/c I think they just mass-delete e-mails.
Used faxzero b/c I think they just mass-delete e-mails.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
Great response, I couldn't have said it better.
To be fair though, I would have to say that it may take time, just the way DOs evolved from drugless practitioners into modern-day physicians. Similarly, NDs may also be in a process of evolution as well, as their curriculum and clinical training gets increasingly science-based. They also have few 1-2 year residencies, though I know they are trying to expand them - although they don't have Medicare support, and their residencies have to be funded from other sources.
Hmm, interesting. I am confused though, as it seems some people still practice.
http://www.scanp.org/SCANPMembers.html I have heard of practitioners in unlicensed states referring to themselves as 'health consultants' (instead of 'naturopathic physicians') where they can dispense supplements and give nutrition and herbal advice, though can't prescribe pharmaceuticals, do gynecological exams, etc. However, since the link you provided says that no naturopathy is legal in South Carolina, I wonder how these people are able to continue to practice.I consider myself very open minded to naturopathic medicine due to my own positive experiences. However, I simply would like to see the study of nutriceuticals and drugless therapies pursued in an evidence-based fashion. My comments on this thread having nothing whatsoever to do with attacking naturopathy. I have friends who are NDs or ND students, and I think they have much to offer. I have merely stated that I'm not certain if the present training of an ND qualifies them for the title of a physician, as their clinical hours are severely lacking compared to MD/DO training. The best people to compare the training of both are people who have pursued both an ND or MD/DO degree. I know that due to economic issues (especially) some naturopathic graduates have pursued or are currently pursuing conventional MD/DO programs afterwards. I would really love to hear their perspectives on how the curriculum and training compares. I think having this dual degree background would give them knowledge to be excellent well-rounded clinicians as we need physicians with more training in herbs, supplements, nutrition etc. I would be thrilled to find a physician with MD, ND training etc. I just am concerned that NDs without any residency training may not be properly trained to prescribe pharmaceutical drugs to the public and act in the role of a PCP - as many NDs are doing.
Edit: That link to the South Carolina naturopathic physicians has some really interesting links. In addition to watching the youtube video of why Dr. Weil thinks NDs should be licensed, there is also a link to ND education which compares their education to allopathic schools. I'd be interested in people's (open-minded) opinions on this. http://www.scanp.org/comparativecurriculacombined_1_.htm
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2006
- Messages
- 514
- Reaction score
- 0
.
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 39
I don't mind when people report my posts ... if they are offensive/rude, then they are against TOS and deserve to be reported. Your post bashed DOs pretty well with the whole 'inferior training, schools, lesser quality students, etc,' so yes, it was offensive and worthy of reporting. However, this thread is to important to rest in the graveyard of JaggerPlate fueled MD vs DO or JaggerPlate vs the world threads ... so I will no longer reply to these types of posts.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2005
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 1
Naturopathy (N.D.) is abject, unequivocal, fear-capitalizing garbage.
Modern medicine is evidence-based such that treatments/ideas are evaluated in a structured, rigorous, academic setting. Take time to fully understand that modern medicine is evidence-based. If you disagree with any part of that statement, you are likely a dull-witted quack or quack-to-be who has no place as a healthcare provider.
Yes, an open mind should be kept in all circumstances as new ideas are critical to the advancement of medical treatment and future modalities. However, once a treatment/modality has been proven to be worthless or at worst detrimental in treatment, it is WRONG to attempt to provide it as treatment, especially to desperately ill patients. This not only applies to naturopathy, but also to chelation therapy, magnet therapy, and some modalities of osteopathic manipulation that have no literature backing them.
The fact that osteopathy and naturopathy are even being used in the same sentence is nauseating.
Modern medicine is evidence-based such that treatments/ideas are evaluated in a structured, rigorous, academic setting. Take time to fully understand that modern medicine is evidence-based. If you disagree with any part of that statement, you are likely a dull-witted quack or quack-to-be who has no place as a healthcare provider.
Yes, an open mind should be kept in all circumstances as new ideas are critical to the advancement of medical treatment and future modalities. However, once a treatment/modality has been proven to be worthless or at worst detrimental in treatment, it is WRONG to attempt to provide it as treatment, especially to desperately ill patients. This not only applies to naturopathy, but also to chelation therapy, magnet therapy, and some modalities of osteopathic manipulation that have no literature backing them.
The fact that osteopathy and naturopathy are even being used in the same sentence is nauseating.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
Have you ever personally been into a naturopathic clinic to see what kind of supplements they sell and what kinds of issues they work with? Don't assume you will find any chakra/energy healing or crystal therapy there. That's not what naturopathic doctors do at all as standard practice. Much of what they use has plenty of research backing it up.
For instance, if you have pre-diabetes, you might be told to do aerobic exercise and weight training (which has been shown to lower blood sugar levels even more than cardio exercise), as well as include more cinnamon into your diet (plenty of research on cinnamon's affect on balancing blood sugar), as well as take supplements like L-glutamine, chromium, and an Ayurvedic-herb gymnestra sylvestre.
The above regimen might be used in place of a standard treatment of Metformin. Even though Metformin is considered a very safe drug, one of the things many doctors may not tell patients (I assume because they are not aware of?) is that Metformin depletes Coenzyme Q10 levels, thus if a doctor is prescribing certain drugs to patients, he/she should have a comprehensive approach to making sure that the drugs aren't depleting other factors: http://www.drhoffman.com/page.cfm/155
In addition to the above example, there are many other very sensical approaches used by naturopaths. For example, if someone is struggling with depression, the first thing an ND (or holistic-oriented MD/DO physician) would do is to first do a neurotransmitter lab test to see which neurotransmitters are too low/high. It makes no sense for a patient to get an anti-depressant that only spares norepinephine if they have low serotonin levels. I'm sure most standard physicians don't do these tests for a reason - as that only increases the cost to the patient. But if the test could be done, that would be ideal. So if you see an ND (or holistic-MD/DO) then you would get a variety of amino acids like 5-HTP/Tryptophan to increase serotonin, or things like Tyrosine to increase dopamine levels, since these are precursors. I don't see what is so radical or dangerous about this at all. It makes sense to me. Why would someone want to take these amino acids rather than the standard SSRIs etc? Well one big issue is that the amino acids add to the system, while SSRIs don't add anything but simply are re-uptake inhibitors (meaning they slow the rate of breakdown of neurotransmitters). This can cause retention in the brain, but insufficient neurotransmitters in the gut (of which there are numerous receptors). Anyway, here's an article by an MD who explains things much better: http://www.vrp.com/articles.aspx?ProdID=800
So I think that NDs treat many conditions in a very sensible way, and have a very useful role. It might be a concern for NDs to start prescribing pharmaceuticals in combination with natural substances (as they may not have sufficient training in pharmacology), but otherwise I think their approach has much merit. Some modalities like homeopathy still make me skeptical, but I will need to read more deeply into that before casting any judgement.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2005
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 1
I like your style. You are very calm, collected, and logical despite my very inflammatory (purposely) post. You're going to make a great doc.
As I was saying prior, if any of those supplements/remedies/practices have proven therapeutic value, then by all means they have a place in medicine. Otherwise, they're simply placebo at best and poison at worst, potentially giving false hope to desperate people.
The ND I like to cite as feces-wrapped-in-skin is Hulda Clark. Her treachery is outlined nicely on Quackwatch so I'll forgo the rant. Homeopathy is just bizarre -- the thought of molecules imparting "essence" to a fluid after they're diluted away billions of times is just dumb.
As I was saying prior, if any of those supplements/remedies/practices have proven therapeutic value, then by all means they have a place in medicine. Otherwise, they're simply placebo at best and poison at worst, potentially giving false hope to desperate people.
The ND I like to cite as feces-wrapped-in-skin is Hulda Clark. Her treachery is outlined nicely on Quackwatch so I'll forgo the rant. Homeopathy is just bizarre -- the thought of molecules imparting "essence" to a fluid after they're diluted away billions of times is just dumb.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2005
- Messages
- 3,245
- Reaction score
- 138
About your MD who explains things, Ward Dean, MD: His projected release date from prison for income tax evasion is January 11, 2012.
http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFind...&FirstName=ward&Race=U&Sex=U&Age=&x=335&y=296
Check out this book of his on the wonders of GHB, the date-rape drug:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/0962741868/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
He writes silly crap like this, collects his millions, and skips out on the tax payments. Not an expert I'd want to quote all that often.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 139
I simply posted that link because it gave an easy to understand explanation of 5-HTP and SSRIs (with plenty of scientific studies listed) which fit into what I was writing about. I had no knowlege of the physician's personal life drama. I could have used a number of other experts to support what I was writing about, but simply liked his explanation. But yeah, on an unrelated note, that's interesting that you made the connection about Ward Dean... good observation. Too bad that people don't use better judgement; especially as a physician, one must realize that stuff like that will come back to haunt you.
Thanks very much for your compliment.
When I told friends that I was starting medical school, they told me that I would have them as patients in 7+ years, so it's nice to know that I'm already building my practice this early in the game. I'm big into understanding the mechanisms of how things work, and hope to apply this evidence-based focus into the study of complementary medicine as well. All the memorization and regurgitation in medical school will probably drive me crazy, since I'm the critical thinker type... though I'll get though regardless. But I do appreciate the kind words.Anyway, if anyone wants to chat more with me about this topic, feel free to do so over PM. I'll be on SDN less frequently as I'm in the process of moving for school, and starting classes shortly. Best wishes to all for the upcoming academic year.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2009
- Messages
- 198
- Reaction score
- 3
That's all great, but that's essentially what we have nutritionists and dieticians for.
In addition, I still think it's still detrimental to the public health for them to be referring to themselves as physicians, especially when patients of naturopaths frequently come out of their meetings with these so-called physicians feeling contemptuous toward, and having little trust for, the medical community.
This is the stupidest thing I have ever heardNeurotransmitter lab test ordered by a ND
"Here you go sir, pee in this cup and Ill tell you how many molecules of GABA are in your brain...".
Man, I know you are into this stuff, and I respect your opinions and all, but this is the very problem with ALL kinds of natural/holistic medicine. It takes concepts that are either so complex that no one really understands them, or makes huge logical leaps that can't really be tested and runs with them. This is why this crap makes so much money, because everyone would love to think that if you just took more tyrosine pills that it would magically make more serotonin in your brain. Lest we forget that tyrosine can be made in the body from phenylalanine and is in just about every meat product on the planet. And to my knowledge there is no way of testing the level of serotonin or any other neurotransmitter in the brain without doing a PET scan. My guess is thats not current protocol in the treatment of depression. But thats the rub, It makes so much sense even though it is complete crap.
There are only two kinds of medicine in the world. Medicine and bulls%%. Anything that really worked would be studied by a hundred pharm companies and would be at a pharmacy, behind the counter, with all the real drugs that are not just water...
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 15,234
- Reaction score
- 7,181
The question/problem is not WHAT they are prescribing, per se. (Although that's not always benign, either).
It's that, unlike MDs and DOs, naturopaths often lack the experience to recognize red flags. Further, they often lack the experience to know which step to take next. This can potentially be catastrophic.
One of the saddest posts I've ever read on SDN seems pretty relevant here:
To translate: the guy had had blood in his urine for a year, but wasn't having any pain with his symptoms. This is often a very, very ominous sign for bladder cancer. Over the year that he spent going to the naturopath, the cancer spread to his prostate and then to the lower half of his spine, which was causing his terrible back pain. (That "gravel" in his prostate? Yeah, that's tumor.) He is most likely going to be dead five years later - it's already spread quite far.
Any med student, MD or DO, is trained to get worried at painless hematuria. Are naturopaths taught this? I wonder.
[And by the way, I trained at an MD school. Not all MDs are like FatKid, thankfully, when it comes to their DO colleagues.
]
Last edited:
Ok.
Here is what I am agreeing with- ND's education needs time to evolve but
ND's are not simply quacks because they are ND's.
*I must point out that although that last story posted by smq123 is absolutely horrific, but the practitioner was a homeopath ( naturalist...?) and this is not ND or Naturopath as far as I am reading anyway. ( Personally, I think homeopathy is questionable.)
None the less this type of abuse - highlights something of indisputable importance, especially as people are turning to alternative care more often. Alternative care is best when used in tandem with solid medical training.
Rkaz is awesome to spend all that time writing out points which I wish I had the time to...
As well, and even though I am not sure that I fully agree with Danzman's position- I can understand where he is are coming from....
But( ?),
- tell me if I am wrong- One needs funding to research and prove the efficacy of treatments- this funding is not always available ( I am not sure if this is a BS line) ?? As well- to put some treatments to a double-blind or hard science study is not always possible.
So there may be some things which are not research based yet that do in fact prove effective. Please tell me if I am uninformed.
I think that Allopathic, Osteopathic, Naturopathic, Oriental and Ayurvedic medicine have substance to offer each other. (And just so I don't get condemned for the above comment I will add, in case it is not obvious...in varying degrees and different ways.)
But I do not think that believing this ='s- believing that marshmallows and cornstarch (was it?) will cure cancer.
Paramount to all of this theory and practice is ethically and morally treating your patients. To me this means knowing what therapies are out there which might help my future patients, knowing what their limits are as well as their strengths and keeping an open objective mind.
Here is what I am agreeing with- ND's education needs time to evolve but
ND's are not simply quacks because they are ND's.
*I must point out that although that last story posted by smq123 is absolutely horrific, but the practitioner was a homeopath ( naturalist...?) and this is not ND or Naturopath as far as I am reading anyway. ( Personally, I think homeopathy is questionable.)
None the less this type of abuse - highlights something of indisputable importance, especially as people are turning to alternative care more often. Alternative care is best when used in tandem with solid medical training.
Rkaz is awesome to spend all that time writing out points which I wish I had the time to...
As well, and even though I am not sure that I fully agree with Danzman's position- I can understand where he is are coming from....
But( ?),
- tell me if I am wrong- One needs funding to research and prove the efficacy of treatments- this funding is not always available ( I am not sure if this is a BS line) ?? As well- to put some treatments to a double-blind or hard science study is not always possible.
So there may be some things which are not research based yet that do in fact prove effective. Please tell me if I am uninformed.
I think that Allopathic, Osteopathic, Naturopathic, Oriental and Ayurvedic medicine have substance to offer each other. (And just so I don't get condemned for the above comment I will add, in case it is not obvious...in varying degrees and different ways.)
But I do not think that believing this ='s- believing that marshmallows and cornstarch (was it?) will cure cancer.
Paramount to all of this theory and practice is ethically and morally treating your patients. To me this means knowing what therapies are out there which might help my future patients, knowing what their limits are as well as their strengths and keeping an open objective mind.
Similar threads
