Naturopaths must be regulated, say experts (1 Viewer)

Laika_

Banned
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
224
Location
USSR
Gender
Female
HSC
2007
Naturopaths must be regulated, say experts


AAP
June 12, 2009 10:12am

ONE in six Australians visit a complementary therapist as their primary health carer, but experts fear many do so without being aware of the possible risks.
University of Queensland researcher Jon Wardle is calling for the registration of complementary medicine therapists to make it safer for people to consult a naturopath.
Mr Wardle, a research scholar in the area of complementary therapy and a qualified naturopath with UQ's School of Population Health, says registration is long overdue.
"One in six people use complementary therapists as their primary healthcare practitioner and yet currently anyone can hang up a shingle and begin practising without any qualifications at all,'' Mr Wardle said.
"This is a major public health issue.''
He said a quack in the NSW city of Newcastle offered cures for untreatable cancers with backyard concoctions.
"This particular man shouldn't have been practising in the first place because he had convictions for fraud and armed robbery, on top of falsifying his qualifications,'' Mr Wardle said.
"This is something that any other health profession would have stripped him from practice straight away, but there's no legal restriction on calling yourself a naturopath.''





A naturopathy student can spend four years obtaining a university degree to practise responsibly or a charlatan can start a practice with little more than a glib tongue.
Complementary medicine groups plan to establish a national register of naturopaths and herbalists by 2010.
Registration already exists for Chinese medicine practitioners, chiropractors and osteopaths.
Head of UQ's School of Medicine, Professor David Wilkinson supported the registration plans.
"It is appropriate that there is increased regulation of complementary medicine practice to ensure educational and ethical standards of practice,'' Prof Wilkinson said.















ONE in six Australians visit a complementary therapist as their primary health carer

um what the fuck? one in 6 people are visiting witches as their PRIMARY health carer?

You can study naturopathy at uni?

Why not just ban them outright due to the lack of scientific evidence proving that there is any benefit in naturopathy?
 

SylviaB

Just Bee Yourself 🐝
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
6,890
Location
Lidcombe
Gender
Female
HSC
2021
If they're stupid enough to only go to naturopath....
 

Laika_

Banned
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
224
Location
USSR
Gender
Female
HSC
2007
yeah then they become even more sick and end up going to hospital for minor things that could have been cured by conventional medicine but now they are out of control
 

Cookie182

Individui Superiore
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
1,484
Location
Global
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Please correct me, but if something is "alternative" medicine, then it is different to medicine, yes?

I then like to think of Medicine as real science and "alternate medicine" as creationism.

If an "alternate" treatment was proven as a tested, scientific treatment, then wouldn't it cease to be "alternate" and become part of medical literature?
 

Cookie182

Individui Superiore
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
1,484
Location
Global
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
yea, i always figured that things like homeopathy/any alternate treatment was a load of pseudo-bullshit, ran by street scammers and gypsies.

Still, I hate psychics/clairvoyants or anyone associated with irrational thoughts even more.
 

Laika_

Banned
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
224
Location
USSR
Gender
Female
HSC
2007
im concerned that 1 in 6 people use them as their main health care

then when it doesnt work and their easily treatable condition gets out of hand they go into the hospitals and place a greater strain on them
 

KFunk

Psychic refugee
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
3,323
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Why not just ban them outright due to the lack of scientific evidence proving that there is any benefit in naturopathy?
Please correct me, but if something is "alternative" medicine, then it is different to medicine, yes?
I then like to think of Medicine as real science and "alternate medicine" as creationism.

If an "alternate" treatment was proven as a tested, scientific treatment, then wouldn't it cease to be "alternate" and become part of medical literature?
Often it seems that the division is more sociological than scientific. Nonetheless, yes, if good evidence is obtained for some form of treatment then it will generally be taken up as part of modern medical practice (note, historically, that many medicines have natural origins - e.g. aspirin was first derived from willow bark and several anticoagulants from snake venom).

If you judge alternative medicial practices by the standard of modern 'evidence based medicine' then they will generally come off worse for wear. In order to be fair I think it is important to take into account (1) the potential value of the placebo effect and (2) the cultural validity of such practices in the context of certain spiritual frameworks, etc. I think we need to monitor what alternative medicine practitioners claim to be able to do, and on the basis of what training, but I personally feel that to ban them outright constitutes a horribly fascist move which takes scientific dogmatism towards its extreme.
 

sydneyphoenix

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2004
Messages
200
Location
Sydney North Shore
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Perhaps the federal government should create the registrating and licensing authority for homeopathy and naturopathy when they bring in national registration for the health professions, as scheduled for 2010. Good timing to bring in the occupations into the fold.
 

*TRUE*

Tiny dancer
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
1,654
Location
Couch
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Naturopathy concerns me in regards to the children of its devotees.
 

Cookie182

Individui Superiore
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
1,484
Location
Global
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Often it seems that the division is more sociological than scientific. Nonetheless, yes, if good evidence is obtained for some form of treatment then it will generally be taken up as part of modern medical practice (note, historically, that many medicines have natural origins - e.g. aspirin was first derived from willow bark and several anticoagulants from snake venom).

If you judge alternative medicial practices by the standard of modern 'evidence based medicine' then they will generally come off worse for wear. In order to be fair I think it is important to take into account (1) the potential value of the placebo effect and (2) the cultural validity of such practices in the context of certain spiritual frameworks, etc. I think we need to monitor what alternative medicine practitioners claim to be able to do, and on the basis of what training, but I personally feel that to ban them outright constitutes a horribly fascist move which takes scientific dogmatism towards its extreme.
I understand what you are saying, but to raise the issue of "scientific dogmatism", would you contend that a society strictly guarded by the findings of science (and only science) is necessarily a bad society?

I'm not really moved against the idea of scientific fascism- I'd argue that any open embrace of the rational and removal of the irrational (paranormal claims/clairvoyancy, pseudo-medicine [note the fraud market here], creationism, etc) would lead to a well-grounded, educated society founded on intelligence and a desire for evidential truths.

I accept that choosing which therapies or supposed areas of "pseudo-science" to ban would be problematic and there are larger cultural/emotional issues at play, but nevertheless I think that I would certainly support a strongly reasoned proposal.
 

Cookie182

Individui Superiore
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
1,484
Location
Global
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Naturopathy concerns me in regards to the children of its devotees.
I'm concerned for the larger collective of children raised in any sort of ungrounded and non-evidential education. I extend this concern to those "born into" religious faiths, cults, particular cultures/tribes which embrace the supernatural or hold largely undesirable practices (circumcision, irrational fears, mysticism) and naturally children raised in pseudo-scientific environments- i.e. believing in spirit-healing, homeopathy...

I was recently watching a dateline story on a particular tribe in Madagascar who are under scrutiny for their ancient practice of abandoning twins (through fears associated with evil spirits etc). One of the many thousand atrocities still committed globally today through irrationality/lack of education.
 

KFunk

Psychic refugee
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
3,323
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
I understand what you are saying, but to raise the issue of "scientific dogmatism", would you contend that a society strictly guarded by the findings of science (and only science) is necessarily a bad society?
I am inclined to think so. There are many practices which are best made sense of in terms of the cultural traditions, moral codes, philosophies, religions, etc., which play a central role in enriching and providing meaning to our lives. Before we ban practices because they don't promote a scientific concept of health we need to first consider whether they fulfill some social function which isn't accounted for in the scientific discourse. If we allow scientific discourse to dictate what is permissible in the absence of such consideration then we fall prey, I believe, to a truly insidious form of scientific dogmatism. There is more to life than quantifiable, evidence-based outcomes imo.
 

Tully B.

Green = procrastinating
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
1,068
Location
inner-westish
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
You know what they call alternative medicine that's been proven to work?
Medicine.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top