Dec 27 2012
Naturopathy Embraces the Four Humors
You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Naturopathy Embraces the Four Humors”.
33 Responses to “Naturopathy Embraces the Four Humors”
The figures about how many patients die from being treated with “allopathic” medicine: It’s really hard to find credible statistics. Numbers from the alternative proponents is one thing, and probably can’t be trusted, but according to American Association for Justice, http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/8677.htm
almost 100,000 Americans die from medical errors each year, making it the sixth most common cause of death. Among their references ar this report: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/1999/To-Err-is-Human-Building-A-Safer-Health-System.aspx and statistics from CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm.
I’ve looked at CDC’s article about causes of death from 2009, where “Accidents (unintentional injuries)” ranks as number 5 with 118,021. AAAJ has the same number, but rank medical errors as number 6 with 98,000. Their number seems to come from the article from IOM, where the number is estimated as “at least 44,000, maybe as many as 98,000).
In CDC’s statistics there is no specific number for medical errors.
This is rather confusing. Anyone know more?
Pernille Nylehn
Norway
@ Jann,
This is an excellent article that highlights the archaic nature of the ideas that underlie naturopathy and many other CAM modalities. Sadly, what you describe here applies directly to acupuncture and Oriental medicine. My article Oriental Medicine: a Tall Tale of Outdated Lore gives some details about the connection between humoriam and acupuncture.
I would like to add a detail about Unani medicine: the word “Unani” (or Yunani), means “Ionian” in Arabic and Persian, it refers to Greeks in general. As you pertinantly state, Unani medicine is simply Islamized Greek humorism. This was done through the works of Avicenna and other medieval physicians along the Silk Road. Contrary to what most CAM providers want us to believe, there is nothing exotic and non-Western in any of their modalities. Actually, Unani medicine is something we gradually abandoned through discoveries between 16th and 19th centuries.
As you state “there is no richer source for argument against CAM practices than the CAM literature itself.” However, most lawmakers are not aware of the fact that the same humorism that killed George Washington through bloodletting to purge excess “heat” (whatever that means) also underlines naturopathy, acupuncture, Oriental medicine, and other such archaic nonsense.
Going back to medieval ignorance in the name of exotism and techophobia is outrageously irresponsible and needs to come to an end for the sake of public safety.
@PernilleN:
Medical errors are an important issue and one that is being addressed by the medical profession. Perhaps I should have come right out and made the point clearly, but in the context of the naturopath’s chart it is simply a means of trying to imply that “allopathic” medicine is dangerous and that one should instead see a naturopath. Of course, “allopathic” medical errors are completely irrelevant to the safety and efficacy of unani/humorism, for which this book provides no convincing evidence. This is a common tactic of CAM promoters when faced with the deficiencies of their own methods of treatment.
Every time I read something like 16 states allowing naturopaths to be primary care physicians, I panic a little bit inside. What are we supposed to do? Because clearly being logical, correct, and quick with simple deconstructions does not seem to help.
I thought all of alternative medicine had the four humours. Giggle, chuckle, guffaw and ROFL!
@FulfilledDeer
I’m with you, but was somewhat heartened by yesterday’s post from Dr. Novella. I’m starting to think that CAM is somewhat self-limiting in its appeal to those who find a philosophical “fit” with it.
I’m sure it’s just a co-incidence that I have been personally plagued by constantly running into these people. Of course, we have to continue to be “logical, correct, and quick with simple deconstructions”, in order to try to limit the spread of Carl Sagan’s Demon-Haunted World–the one book I most often recommend to the superstitious.
@FulfilledDeer
I’ve always been in favour of embracing the “Secular atheism; agnosticism; modern evolutionary nihilism” ascribed to us by the book. We let people choose the medical intervention they want to pursue, and over the course of hundreds of years, a particular strain of human thought should be weeded out by evolutionary pressures.
I wrote about the common accusation of “Death by Medicine” at
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/death-by-medicine/
I would argue that effective medicine with a relatively small rate of human errors is superior to ineffective medicine with no errors at all.
Jann Bellamy, I totally agree, and I’m so sick of naturopaths saying medical errors are a reason in itself to go faulty practitioners.
But I still wonder about the numbers. Is there any way of finding which numbers are the best approximation to the truth? NB I know it’s difficult.
This too may be humorous!
The principle ND editor of the TNM 4th edition (and previous) is Joe Pizzorno, whose Bastyr-centered empire was / is build on the moniker:
“one of the world’s leading authorities on science based natural medicine” and
“leading the forefront of science based natural medicine” (see http://drpizzorno.com/dr-joseph-pizzorno/ ).
Yet, it’s a strange kind of science that permits nonscience within its locus. It’s quite a bogus locus.
I enjoy the ‘junk though’ label that Susan Jacoby uses otherwheres.
In 2006, I’d posted a review of the ‘philosophy’ chapter from the 3rd edition on Amazon and it’s still there
(see http://www.amazon.com/review/R3O3Y1LGUXC0Y9/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0443073007&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag= ) .
Boy, oh boy it is not liked by the crowd that goes there for that book: 15 of 109 people found the review helpful and I do wonder how many requests were made to have it removed.
That ‘philosophy’ chapter hasn’t changed in the 4th edition. The only difference is that the author has changed genders, actually: Randall is now Rachelle, and the chapter number moved from chapter number 6 to chapter number 5.
I know too much about this nonsense, and I wouldn’t change a thing in that review.
-r.c.
@Janet
That is a fantastic book, I haven’t read it in a while. I think I’ll break it out tonight (metaphorically – it will be the digital copy) and hopefully calm down. And while I certainly agree with your take on yesterday’s article and the self-limiting nature of the beast, the issue as I see it is more than people deciding to get un-medical care. It’s the erosion of the medical, medical education, governmental (not the least of which in the form of grants), and scientific institutions that really worries me. Many times when talking about CAM I find myself musing that if something like acupuncture touted itself as is – a religion – I wouldn’t be nearly as incensed. I absolutely draw the line when CAM dilutes actual science (and no, that does not make science even more potent). In the vein of Hitchens I have to conclude that CAM poisons everything.
Along those same lines @WilliamLawrenceUtridge, as callous as your (satirical?) suggestion is, I have to point out that the CAM does not likely exert enough of an evolutionary pressure to provide for differential reproduction. Now if people had to choose CAM emergency treatment vs. real emergency treatment, maybe things would be different….but that world only exists in sketch shows.
@daijiyobu
there are now 16 people who found the review helpful
@大丈夫
Way to go, Ron.
Indeed it is and indeed this is. I don’t know much about naturopathy yet I’d no idea it would be all Greek to me.
And to contemplate the fact, the strange fact, that humors are actually being used in a modern textbook that is not satire, a work of fiction (well, this book -could- fall into that category) or poetry is amazing. Amazing in much the same way I would be amazed if I were to come across someone getting ready to go to France by sailing the atlantic in a brig with only the stars go guide them by. They might get there, they might not, but with a GPS available, why not use it? Or skip the brig and get on the Queen Mary II. Or just take a plane.
@mho
Thanks for being helpful.
日本語は難しいです
-r.c.
Quill,
Navigating by the stars is completely scientific and works fine if you know how to do it. There might be easier ways to find France, but knowing the stars will get you there.
Using the humours as a basis for medicine is like trying to find France with your magic amulet and the ashes of a Parisian homing pigeon. It’s not just old-fashioned, it’s complete fantasy.
@ geack: Thanks for pointing out my analogy is not very good. Yours is better and much more naturopathic.
That being said, the “if you know how to do it” is the big problem with most things these days, education being what it is. Or no longer is, to be more precise. The fact this book that is the subject of the post could be considered a textbook of modern practicality is quite amazing, being as it is apparently printed with such magical ashes.
@PernilleN
This blog post has very good resources for different numbers of medical errors and some links to methodologies
http://www.leanblog.org/2009/08/statistics-on-healthcare-quality-and/
I completely agree with Jann….this tactic completely disregards the reality of error reporting and tries to move attention away from the issue at hand.
When considering medical errors, you really can’t compare naturopaths and allopathic medicine. For example, many of the deaths counted each year as being preventable errors are from hospital acquired infections….there is no comparable statistic for naturopaths, since there are no naturopathic hospitals (or at least I hope there aren’t).
The more well regulated an industry, the more errors are going to be counted. You have to have a certain baseline infrastructure to even begin to count errors appropriately…things like standards of care etc. that naturopaths simply don’t have. Additionally, if a naturopath makes a mistake, the patient can still return to “normal” medicine to fix it….and naturopaths don’t tend to be nearly as attractive for lawsuits as MDs and hospital systems are.
Also, is there anyone in naturopathic medicine who even claims to be tracking their practitioners errors? Just because no one’s counting the errors doesn’t mean they’re not happening (leaving aside the fact that the whole method of treatment is itself an error).
[...] [6] Naturopathy embraces the four humors [...]
Bs king, the blog you linked to, is that some kind of joke? He just throws out dozens of completely different number, ranging from 44,000 to 195,000 … and 380,000 dying in nursing home because of infections. I haven’t looked through all his links, but the sheer absurdity of the blog post put me off trying to find out more.
As for the alleged 380,000 deaths from infections in nursing homes, does he mean they were preventable? Old people get pneumonia and influenza and UTIs like everyone else, and often they die from them. But it’s not because they are in a nursing home. They are in a nursing home because they are sick, and since they are sick and fragile they contract infections.
If he means they would have survived if they were at home instead, I think he and I live on different planets. And if he’s right, I’m a mass murderer: I’ve been a consultant in several nursing homes, and lots of my patients have died from infections. I didn’t realize it was my fault.
[...] Naturopathy Embraces the Four Humors It’s enough to give one the vapors. [...]
Sorry, wasn’t trying to be funny, just thought it was interesting how many wildly different numbers there were when the methodology was changed slightly. I thought it spoke a bit to your point about good data being hard to find. It seemed that malpractice lawyers and websites that give physician referrals reported very high numbers. I just thought it was interesting to see all the different numbers in one spot…but it definitely did get messy.
I’ll admit, I didn’t read all the way down the page. The one about the nursing home infections is interesting….I couldn’t actually find that particular stat on the CMS website, and the only thing I could find about infections clarified that it included UTIs and pneumonia, and was talking about infectious agents in general and how it was a requirement that nursing homes have an infection control program.
No reference to nursing home consultants being mass murderers, so I think you’re off the hook
.
Sorry for the crazy link…
To make up for that link, here’s one to a paper that highlights the potential problems with the 44,000-98,000 number you originally mentioned:
http://uwf.edu/sahls/medicalinformatics/docfiles/debates%20usa%20death%20rates.pdf
Apparently the studies those were derived from did not include a baseline estimate of how many of those patients might have died anyway.
Thanks!
Not to prattle on about naturopathy, but, to corrupt Samuel Beckett from 1954:
“I can’t prattle on, so I’ll prattle on…”
re: “”the American Association of Naturopathic Medicine [...and] licensing of ‘naturopathic doctors’ [...] more [are] targeted for 2013″,
in my state of Connecticut, where they are already licensed under a long-standing drugless practitioner act, they’ve requested scope changes for 2013, which will include all schedule I-V pharmaceutical, injections and IVs, and changing their title to NMD from ND [drugless no more!]
(see http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/practitioner_licensing_and_investigations/_2013_scope_of_practice/natureopaths_9-12.pdf ) [check out how many times the root 'scien' is in that letter, and the word "effective"!].
My January posts at Naturocrit will include something regarding that ND Aresco letter, and excerpts from a few chapters from the new TNM, which I’ve been scanning and OCRing, so I can better search it. [Could they make the font size any smaller? It's like reading a PDR. Thank goodness for a hobby knife and Omnipage.]
-r.c.
[...] And yet they have. (If you aren’t already a reader of Science-based Medicine.org, I would ask that you check it out sometime.) Naturopaths who are trained – and encouraged – to make use of long-debunked, baseless beliefs about how the body functions have now apparently been told in their textbooks that the ancient Greek belief in the existence of the four humors is a practice worth incorporating into their ‘modern, scientifically-oriented’ system of healing. That’s right: according to their own textbooks, naturopaths claim that they are, in fact, adherents to the scientific method: This section presents a historic, scientific, and practical review of the schools of thought and modalities of natural medicine. We have compiled the work of experts in their fields into what we hope the reader will find a concise, yet useful, description of these practices and modalities. Because of the clinically oriented and alternative nature of these disciplines, the scientific evaluation of their theories and efficacy has been limited in the past. Happily, published research in natural medicine has increased dramatically since A Textbook of Natural Medicine was first published in 1985. [...]
@FulfilledDeer…You asked what we can do to deny licensure to naturopaths and other CAM stylists. One answer is to engage CAM legislatively. Local, regional, county and state medical societies must work, personally and collectively, in concert with their legislators and lobbyists, to refute licensure applications at every turn. It doesn’t matter what you or I think; if the state says they are allowed to practice “medicine” as “naturopathic physicians,” the horse is out of the barn forever. Note an earlier DAIJIYOBU post re: naturopathic efforts to expand their scope of practice in CT. And it will never end! I am enclosing a 2011 letter from the Mass. Medical Society that successfully stopped one such attempt vs. naturopaths:
https://www.massmed.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=MMS_Testimony&CONTENTID=52754&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm
@NYUDDS
That 2011 letter is great reading.
@NYUDDS
Side question: are you at NYU?
Back to the point: how to do that? I’m totally willing to give of my time (such that it is), but I’m just not sure how to go about it. The only idea I have had so far is to create a SBM club at my med school (though I despise “clubs”). Also, is “SBM” copyrighted? Could I use it for the club name, or would that be a violation?
Anthroposophic medicine (from Rudolf Steiner) also relies on the notion of the “four humors.” This link will give you the general idea:
http://www.anthromed.org/Article.aspx?artpk=452
Dr. Gorski wrote about anthroposophic medicine here:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/a-university-of-michigan-medical-school-alumnus-confronts-anthroposophic-medicine-at-his-alma-mater/
Anthroposophy, for those who don’t know, is the basis of the Waldorf schools, also called Steiner schools. Steiner/Waldorf families are often referred to anthroposophic physicians.
funny how that thread stopped so abruptly after someone brought up anthroposophical medicine – essentially a ‘humorism’ based philosophy of medicine for MDs. probably important to include ever-expanding number of MDs who practice ‘SCAM’ in these kind of discussions
BTW, aside from anthroposophical MDs has anyone actually seen direct reference (such as an NDs website) to a naturopath who talks about their use of ‘humorism’ and what it actually means to them?
seems kind of ‘unscientific’ to site this one excerpt from one book and generalize about how this influences the entire practice of natural medicine and everyone who practices it.
im sure i can find more ‘evidence based’ discussion about how natural medicine is a peril to our society. ill keep looking
[...] http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/naturopathy-embraces-the-four-humors/#more-23924 [...]