From: kevin@pages.com (Kevin Sven Berg)
Subject: Re: Healthy skepticism 
Organization: Pages Software Inc.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:33:10 GMT

In article <C162DD.7nL@cs.uiuc.edu> mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)  
writes:
> In article <1993Jan20.044045.7606@pages.com>, kevin@pages.com (Kevin Sven  
Berg) writes:
> |> 
> |> I'm frankly skeptical reading an article published by someone who
> |> has a vested interest in discrediting a competitor. That is, Dr.
> |> Gorski profits by the medical business generated through his own claims.
> |> 
> |> If Dr. Gorski would refrain from collective allegations and care to
> |> back up both his and the Naturopathic claims by studies then I
> |> would find it interesting. As it stands, his piece is as appalling
> |> as tabloid journalism.
> 
> But if he wasn't an MD you would say "He doesn't know what he is 
> talking about."  And if he DOES know what he is talking about,
> and DOESN'T speak up, he is guilty of malpractice and breach
> of professional ethics.  Sheesh!
> 
> If you would refraim from personal attacks on the motives of the
> author (for which you, in fact, have no evidence at all), and 
> instead READ what he said, you might notice that he DID back up 
> his claims.  If "Naturalpaths" can back their claims, let them
> do so.  I'll be very surprised.

... I did READ it ... :-)

Robert,

I don't believe I was making a personal attack. I am concerned with
the inaccurate reporting on the part of the Skeptical Inquirer. In
this case, the I cite the author has not performed enough research
and writes to lead the reader into believing specific statements
apply to the a collective group. In short, I found the article
misleading.

I point out the vested interest simply to note that YOU the reader
have as much ability to find the facts from interdisciplinary
research, not just the medical profession (keep in mind it is a
large profession, with the 2nd largest political clout in D.C.,
represents a significant proportion of GNP, and is subject to the
dynamics of business).

Let me also state my position clearly: I'm not a doctor (and 
don't even play one on TV :-). I am very interested in health and
health-related issues, and do take personal responsibility for
my own health.

Let's take a look at what was said (I'll see what I can do in
limited time)...

    But like homeopathy, naturopathy's roots also lie in the 
    reaction by some physicians of 19th Century reaction against  the
    bleedings and purgings of prescientific medicine.  In  this

Incorrect: Western naturopathic roots extend at least to Hippocrates.
BTW: The hippocratic oath is Pythagorean, I believe; and has nothing
to do with Hippocrates, who studied body processes and nature.
Dr. Kavorkian (yes, Dr. Death) has made some interesting lectures 
in this area. M.D. Gorski does indicate the early twentieth century
was the formation of the ANA.

    But today, with ...[] ... a lack of  understanding and
    suspicion of science, naturopathy has found fertile ground for a
    comeback.

This is an allegation that Naturopathy/Naturopathic thinking is not
grounded in scientific principle. (Is there something inherently
inconsistent with applying logical analysis, double blind studies,
etc. with a desire to pursue holistic approaches -- a kind of
systems theory, if you will).

   An N.D. (Doctor of Naturopathy) degree can be had today as a 
   mail-order item.  But there also exist two 4-year  Naturopathic
   Schools.  In an effort to earn some  respectability, these
   institutions try to emulate to some  extent the course of studies
   offered at reputable medical  schools.

This text misleads the reader into thinking Naturopathic degrees
are an exception. Only toward the end of this same paragraph does he
state that "little more than half in Washington and Oregon". The
reader is not told about N.D. regulations in those states, which
(I believe, last time I checked) require 4-year degree minimum.
Also note that M.D. Gorski attributes "respectability" motives to
institutions he does not represent. It is my understanding that
these schools undertook rigorous medical programs and state
regulation to combat against unknowledgeable practitioners and
provide the public with a reasonable safeguards against "quackery".
Furthermore, at least for John Bastyr College, the medical
program rivals that of traditional colleges [anecdotal evidence:
friends have described course work only to find they had performed
the same things; the main difference appears to be in specialization
and internships].

	...Because of their emphasis on "natural"  healing
        methods, for example, they may oppose such public  health
        measures as water supply fluoridation and the  vaccination of
        children.

I believe this is an case of specific instance being applied
to the aggregate of N.D.'s. Perhaps M.D. Gorski can provide
the incriminating evidence (?). I would also like to see (any)
reports on the effects of floride in the body.

	...Their knowledge of nutrition is,  more often than not,
        nutrition pseudoscience, according to  William Jarvis, Ph.D., a
        professor of health education at  Loma Linda University and the
        President of the National  Council Against Health Fraud.

Again, to whom is he referring? The studies I have seen appear to
be well-researched; here I'm referring to interdisciplinary research
into digestive enzymes or immunology, for example. Is Ph.D. Jarvis is 
suggesting we've been defrauded by our university systems?

       [Naturopathic treatment of strep] ...Such  claims and practices are 
       simply false, and can be  exceedingly dangerous ...

Here M.D. Gorski does a good job of describing specifics, and a lousy
job at follow-through. If such claims are false, he has pitted one
study against nothing (i.e. why are these claims false).

      Naturopaths claim that herbal products are better because 
      they're found in nature, whereas synthetic materials are 
      "chemicals the body's never been exposed to before," and so  are
      more dangerous according to Pizzorno.  This assumes that  every
      plant product on the planet was in the immediate  environment of
      our African primate ancestors, of course.  It's also a bit like
      saying that we should be restricting  our building materials to
      grass, mud, and rocks since steel,  glass and concrete weren't
      present during the course of  human evolution.

The ending analogy is totally unfounded. What has happened here is
that much has been taken out of context, perhaps to suit the presentation.
I believe Pizzorno is referring to "trace elements", or residues that
are present as a result of manufacturing process (If you're interested
I can dig up specifics). Many of these are recognized toxins by other
areas of medical science. Trace elements typically exhibit behavior
of accumulating in the body over many years before indicating discernible  
problems. Pharmaceuticals typically are not tested over these lengthy periods,
(usually because market pressures and business dynamics) and so lab
tests may indeed be negative. The assertion by M.D. Gorski about every
plant being immediately available to our African ancestors is equally
unfounded, malicious, and degrading. It displays N.D. practitioners as
simple-minded on the basis of history and botany. If fact, Both modern
pharmaceutical practice and Naturopathy benefit from world anthropology,
and medical diversity. The interpretation ends up slightly different.

     Naturopaths claim that purifying a drug from  a plant material
     makes it more toxic, which is why they  prefer to use the whole
     herb in their treatments.  [M.D. William] Bennett  says: 
     "That's a piece of 19th Century romantic philosophy."

The quote from M.D. Bennett focuses on a the removal of a specific 
material (like digoxin), not the process in which trace elements can
be introduced. But we've already covered that...

     ...Naturopath Pizzorno also claims that
     "many of  the herbs have synergistic agents that work together to 
     produce the effect you're looking for."  But the fact is  that no
     one has identified such "synergistic agents."

I do not know about the situation of processed herbs, but it is
certainly true that modern science has identified natural enzymes
which indeed, have been shown to have "synergistic" effects in
the body. These enzymes are effectively destroyed above 140 degrees F,
which rules out their presence in most processed materials.

     Despite their antipathy to drugs, naturopaths have fought  for
     and won the right to prescribe in the states of  Washington and
     Oregon.  Some also practice obstetrics and  perform minor
     surgery.  And while they claim to be an  "alternative" to
     high-priced conventional medicine, they  have also actively
     pursued the right to bill insurance  companies and other
     third-party payers for their services.

This is probably another topic entirely, which is extremely
emotional right now: the right of people to choose the type
and care of their own bodies. In particular, review the recent
"Death with Dignity" movements, or the Hemlock society.

     [mention of "alternative" approaches...]
     ... and colonic  irrigation (enema therapy)

What percentage of colons appear to be abnormal in the
american population? I believe I saw AMA studies of up to 98%!
Gee, our society also has an extremely high rate of colon
problems including cancer, and hemorrhoids. Note that there
are other cultures (Soviet) who have done extensive study
and application of colon treatments.

     ... massage therapy

I'll take this any day :-) a great way to relieve stress.

     ... acupuncture

This could be another subject entirely. Suffice to say that most
research in this area has not been done in the U.S. I find the
use of accupuncture for painless child-birth extremely intreaguing.
Quackery? All of those mothers didn't appear to need morphine!

     ... iridology

I understand the results are "inconclusive" in this area, not
that it has no benefit. In particular, Dr. Jensen seems to have
done nice work for these studies. The premise (theory) is that
certain body parts (namely the iris) reflect the state of other
parts of the body. This isn't far fetched, in fact it happens to
be current study in immunology (neuropeptides, I believe).

     ... homeopathy

Personally I think we'll see more light on this in the future,
especially as it relates to immune processes. Interestingly
enough, Dr. Gorski earlier mentions penicillin, which is fits
the homeopathic model.

     ...If the
     4-year colleges teach  any science, it doesn't seem to have an
     effect. Many  naturopaths are little more than jacks of all
     quackeries. 

After only listing terms, some less respected than others,
Dr. Gorski goes on to lambast N.D.'s psuedo-science (without
explaining how they are unscientific). This is then used to
bolster his position that they are "jacks of all quackeries".
He hasn't told us much.

     In defense of naturopathy, proponents point to their 
     frequent "success" in handling minor illnesses, infections  that
     are less than life-threatening, and chronic medical  problems for
     which medical science can offer no cures  either.

Actually, there are a number of studies which indicate just
the opposite: M.D. Elton Baker comes to mind, and his success
in applying raw-food diet to cancer remission. Also, M.D. Dean
Orlish (sp?), who presented an extended study to the AMA on
effect of diet, meditation, and exercise (Yoga/T'ai Chi) on
patients with terminal cardio-vascular problems. In the case of
the former, the study included a large sample (100+?); the
control group consistently got worse, or died while the test
group at least broke even, many improved their condition.
I recall one study of influenza patients where diet related
treatment beat traditional medicinal treatment by significant 
statistically measures. Quacks? Who's quackin' who?!?

     ...Undoubtedly,
     lavishing attention and "natural  healing" therapies of some kind
     on people suffering from  disorders with a psychosomatic
     component is likely to  benefit some of them.  

There's an interesting study quoted by Talbot about psychosomatic
components in AMA surgery and pharmaceuticals. Again, caught w/o references, 
but I can look it up if you so desire. My point is that Dr. Gorski certainly 
should be or make himself familiar with these facts before presenting a paper 
seeking to expose the fraud of others.

Finally, I'd like to point out that the AMA has been
extremely slow to embrace preventative medicine or studies.
It should be noted that those studies that have been undertaken
show the body does possess 'amazing' abilities to heal itself
given the opportunity (with or without Mr N.D. :-). Personally I
feel there is room for both approaches; especially given an open,
analytical mind which can discard that which is not applicable.
I feel in the case of Dr. Gorksi he has presented evocative
material which does not serve this purpose.

regards,

Kevin


-- 
Kevin Sven Berg               /    /    /    /  P /  a /  g /  e /  s
kevin@pages.com              /    /    /    /    /    /    /    / 
Pages Software Inc.         /    /    /    /    /    /    /    /   
San Diego, CA.               .    .    .    .    .    .    .    .