Topic: We should ban naturopathy
A ban on naturopathy creates a cohesive front between scientists and the government that can combat the anti-science rhetoric of naturopathic industries.
a consumer doesn't know what's really in natural remedies since there is no regulation
a disadvantage of naturopathy is when natural medicines are taken to treat medical conditions without seeking qualified medical help
a lot of naturopaths suggest things without scientific backing, which may harm the patient.
a lot of what they do is dangerous including opposing vaccines.
a person should decide what to do with their bodies not the government. if they desire to seek alternative medicine they should be free to do so
a sick person should be allowed to try anything they want, long as it's legal, that claims it will help them with their ailment.
According to the American Cancer Society, "scientific evidence does not support claims that naturopathic medicine can cure cancer or any other disease".
adults should be allowed to make their own medical treatment decisions
all natural, non-invasive and promoting self-healing. natural plus green is always winning combination.
all persons should have the final say over their own lives and bodies. bodily autonomy should be up held above all. as long as properly informed about naturopathy, it should be a personal choice.
allowing people to falsely believe things such as diet can cure their cancer causes them to pass away instead of seeking treatment that likely would have saved them.
allowing people to try to use natural ways to heal themselves without being stuck within the parameters of medicine that doctors and insurance companies want to push on you can be beneficial.
alternative medicine provides relief in the form of the placebo effect
alternative medicines dont bring enough money into the government
alternative types of medicine such as diet, exercise and massages work for some people and it should not be banned.
Although naturopathy doesn't always make things better, it very rarely makes things physically worse, and makes people feel better via the placebo effect in a meaningful way.
Although naturopathy is rarely validated via the scientific method, it is often upheld by years of anecdotal evidence and cultural history that is also valid.
any alternative medicine is in doubt because do not have evidence in western medicine and their result could be useful as well opposite.
any alternative medicine, such as naturopathy, is valid if there is a chance of giving a sufferer relief from pain.
anything which brings relief, even if that is akin to a placebo effect, can only be a good thing to those in need.
as long as it does not harm anyone it should not be banned
at least for children, they should be treated with the best care possible since they can't make decisions for themselves.
banning natuopathy is against people's freedoms.
banning naturopathy as a whole is the wrong move.  massage falls under that label and has been proven to be highly effective for many ailments.
banning naturopathy is an affront to some religions and cultures.