Naturopath Education vs Med School

Eos of the Eons

Mad Scientist
Eos of the Eons
Joined
Jul 23, 2003
Messages
13,749
Okay, there have got to be resources that show the difference between naturopath educations and actual MD and pre-med educations.

The pre-med students I went to school with even had to take English courses. They had to pass chemistry, etc.

Thing is, I've been to a real college that teaches these things and a more superflous college where the instructors thought they knew more than my college chemistry teachers.

I mean, the ones at the superflous college didn't even know genetics, but were trying to tell us what they though cancer was. I was thoroughly disgusted by the ignorant version, and got the medical dictionary out to show the instructor that cancer was actually our cells gone awry, and had everything to do with genetics.

There was a huge difference between real genetics and these woo woo instructors' thoughts on cancer.

Hence, it irks me that people are saying that the educations of naturopaths and pre-med students and MDs and NDs are in any way comparable. They even go as far as to say an ND is an equal to an oncologist!! yep, they both supposedly got pre-med, and then just specialized *gak*.
 
Sadly this may only change when the first Naturopath(I'm not going to give them the honor of calling them Naturopathic "doctor") kills a high profile patient with their new found power to prescribe real meds because of their incompetence.
 
I live about twenty five miles from the NYS Chiropractic College. My friend's younger brother is going there. I got the look of death when I asked why he didn't just apply to med school. The subject is now forbidden from our conversations.
 
Eos of the Eons said:
Okay, there have got to be resources that show the difference between naturopath educations and actual MD and pre-med educations.

The pre-med students I went to school with even had to take English courses. They had to pass chemistry, etc.

Thing is, I've been to a real college that teaches these things and a more superflous college where the instructors thought they knew more than my college chemistry teachers.

I mean, the ones at the superflous college didn't even know genetics, but were trying to tell us what they though cancer was. I was thoroughly disgusted by the ignorant version, and got the medical dictionary out to show the instructor that cancer was actually our cells gone awry, and had everything to do with genetics.

There was a huge difference between real genetics and these woo woo instructors' thoughts on cancer.

Hence, it irks me that people are saying that the educations of naturopaths and pre-med students and MDs and NDs are in any way comparable. They even go as far as to say an ND is an equal to an oncologist!! yep, they both supposedly got pre-med, and then just specialized *gak*.
Click to expand...

I think the admission credit requirements vary tremendously. Some have the same prerequisites as MD programs (biochem, organic chem...) Others don't require postsecondary of any kind.

You can check admission requirements individually:

[List of accredited schools of naturopathic medicine in North America]


I had a look at the one closest to me - Boucher, in New Westminster - and this admission criteria caught my attention:

* [must] be able to demonstrate an ability for critical thinking and have good communication skills;
Click to expand...


Also: nice to see they have a part-time option. (Ahem)
 
Last edited:
paximperium said:
Sadly this may only change when the first Naturopath(I'm not going to give them the honor of calling them Naturopathic "doctor") kills a high profile patient with their new found power to prescribe real meds because of their incompetence.
Click to expand...

History suggests this is unrealistically optomistic.

DSHEA is going strong despite high-profile deaths from supplements that should never have been available in the marketplace. I'm thinking of a baseball player, here.

Paul Offit discusses exactly this with the antivax debate in the Wired article [An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All]

“I used to say that the tide would turn when children started to die. Well, children have started to die,” Offit says, frowning as he ticks off recent fatal cases of meningitis in unvaccinated children in Pennsylvania and Minnesota. “So now I’ve changed it to ‘when enough children start to die.’ Because obviously, we’re not there yet.”
Click to expand...
 
I am beginning to think that the Legitimazation of Quackery we are starting to see is the most dangerous and deadly form of woo out there at the moment. Creationism is bad, sure, but it can't directly kill people the way Quackery can.
 
It is also relentlessly defended with all the usual claims that MDs are sooo stupid that they only treat "symptoms", and herbs and homeopathy somehow treat the "whole person" instead! This MD bashing is so hypocritical.

Hey, if you want to see what set me off, there are some trolls making all these claims on facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?/group.p...d=11349320865&mid=188b8e8G237d30c8G41db73cG37

Kelly and Sally think they are winning arguments, but we should invite them here.

I've asked them to come show us how naturopathy educations are the same as an MD's. Not sure they'll show up though...
 
Last edited:
There are some M.D./N.D.s, but I don't see how Naturopaths should differ from Nutritionists in qualifications. There are also many M.D.s/D.O.s and pharmacists who often play naturopath(Mike Mercola and Dave Ou). These people have strong educational backgrounds, but might not always use them.
 
lightfire22000 said:
There are some M.D./N.D.s, but I don't see how Naturopaths should differ from Nutritionists in qualifications. There are also many M.D.s/D.O.s and pharmacists who often play naturopath(Mike Mercola and Dave Ou). These people have strong educational backgrounds, but might not always use them.
Click to expand...
Naturopathy is a claptrap mix of every "alternative" medicine nonsense you can think of. It mixes in a bunch of herbalism, crystal and touch healing, magnetics, homeopathy, pseudo-nutrition etc etc etc. Basically every non-evidenced based medical fad and nonsense you can think of is dumped into Naturopathy. When you have no standards of evidence, all nonsense are equal in their eyes.

There are bad MDs/DOs. But there are no good Naturopaths.
 
I've just had two conversations about medical training this evening - the first with the local GP's wife who came off the medical register herself a year ago because she couldn't keep up with the stringent and rigorous requirements to keep herself registered while she was taking a career break, and the second with a friend working part time as a GP who is doing it, but confirming how onerous and challenging the requirements now are.

I asked her why she didn't just put up her plate as a homoeopath, and she choked on her coffee.

At the same time as regulations are making it harder and harder for real doctors to keep practising, by loading them with assessments and re-validations and so on, they're allowing quacks the legitimacy of "regulation" with none of this hassle.

I think we took a wrong turn somewhere.

Rofe.
 
It's the politicians and rich people who can fund appeals to politicians. If you make something political you can get laws done up to make you able to call yourself a "doctor" in a NON medical school with a NON medical education. Worked for Palmer and his son Eons ago, and is now working for woo woos who want to work in hospitals without worrying about a real med school education and those crappy laws that real medical doctors have to worry about to stay in practice.


It's a wrong turn alright. However, if that's what people are so convinced is better for them, then I don't mind seeing them suffer from untreated cancer at the hands of a naturopath so much.
and YEAH, crystals and herbs are not "treatments" for cancer, so you're not doing anything, hence your cancer is untreated if you're not seeing an actual oncologist!!!

My mother-in-law's sister let her cancer go untreated for a long time at the advice of her naturopathy wannabe daughter in law. She did stupid things like coffee enemas. My mother in law's sister is now dead from cancer. By the time she saw a real doctor it was too late, but they tried some treatments to no avail.

My mother in law has me for a daughter in law, and when she got diagnosed with lung cancer at a very early stage in one lobe of her lungs, and not yet spread anywhere else, I encouraged her to listen to real doctors. Some surgery and radiation later she is cured, and stopped smoking too. She didn't even need chemo. She can't run a marathon, but she looks and feels great and is back to work.

So, I know this is an anecdote, but you can clearly see what harm a fraccin naturopath can do when influencing people with serious illnesses. It's just sick. They should all be sued for every death they contribute, but they get off scot fraccin free! And do I get any kudos for encouraging my mother in law to see a real doctor? No, I get called a know it all!!! Hey, your mom is alive and your aunt is DEAD!! Ingrate.
 
Last edited:
paximperium said:
Naturopathy is a claptrap mix of every "alternative" medicine nonsense you can think of. It mixes in a bunch of herbalism, crystal and touch healing, magnetics, homeopathy, pseudo-nutrition etc etc etc. Basically every non-evidenced based medical fad and nonsense you can think of is dumped into Naturopathy. When you have no standards of evidence, all nonsense are equal in their eyes.

There are bad MDs/DOs. But there are no good Naturopaths.
Click to expand...

Well I am sure there are a few former naturopaths who have reformed and stoped practicing. They would be the good naturopaths.
 
Eos of the Eons said:
It is also relentlessly defended with all the usual claims that MDs are sooo stupid that they only treat "symptoms", and herbs and homeopathy somehow treat the "whole person" instead!
Click to expand...

Ah, MDs used to concentrate on treating the whole person. Of course, back when they used to do that, life expectancy was 40 or so, too.
 
Eos of the Eons said:
... who want to work in hospitals without worrying about a real med school education and those crappy laws that real medical doctors have to worry about to stay in practice.
Click to expand...

Well, this hasn't happened yet. At least where I'm practicing. I take care of critically ill cancer patients as part of my practice in the ICU. But, I've long ago abandoned crusading, on an individual level, against protecting people from their own stupidity. Not my role. It takes too much time, it doesn't get me anywhere, and ultimately I have enough patients and problems to take care of that I have no worries I'll ever have not enough work to do.

However, my biggest complaint about the political lobbying and legal maneuvering for expanded practice rights of "undertrained" healthcare providers is that, if and when they get their wishes, (1) they ultimately won't really add anything else clinically meaningful to the care of the patient except additional cost (2) at the very best, the patient will only get an "ersatz" level of care... for which that sub par provider will expect the level same remuneration, and (3) they expect us to manage their ineluctable complications when they arise.

Probably the last one is most frustrating.

Bottom line, though, is that they don't really want to take care of the dreadfully sick patients that are, for lack of a better term, swirling down the drain. No, the irony is that this is when many of them will abandon their patient... when they need them most. You see, it's not the practitioners fault that they haven't responded to the prescribed therapy and treatment plan; it's something inherently wrong with the patient - the patient didn't follow the treatment course properly... the disease was "too advanced" before they sought treatment... you will hear all manner of excuses.

It's funny, too, that this is usually the point they expect me and my colleagues to step in and try to clean up the mess, actually far after irreparable damage has been done. I've seen this firsthand in a handful of cases. And, it's also, not surprisingly so, that many of these patients and their family members are fairly humiliated and embarrassed to even talk with me about the fact they they first tried ineffective therapies by the time the get to me. They feel duped. They feel cheated. They feel like they've lost a chance.

In many cases they might have. That's the real damage being done here.

~Dr. Imago
 
Thank you Dr. Imago.

Basically, no med school has accredited any naturopathy school. Saying the educations are equal is just plain WRONG.

Naturopaths are NOT pre-med students who go onto "specialize" in naturopathy!
 
The only prerequisite course/degree wise at the Medical School I went to was that you had to have a minimum of a Bachelor's Degree. It could be a BA, BSc, etc... That was the minimum. A large # of people entering the medical school had masters or PhD's. Some had Nursing Degrees, some had Pharmacy Degrees. In fact one of my classmates did a 6 year electrical engineering degree prior to entering.

Once in (after your interview, MCAT, References, Volunteer work, 3.5-4.0 GPA in Uni courses), the course load, to the best of my recollection (I graduated with my MD 11 years ago) was,

Year #1 (August to June) = Human Anatomy, Biochemistry, Genetics, Community Medicine, Human Physiology

Year #2 (August to June) = Body Systems (about 1 month covering each body system, Cardiovascular, Respiratory, Neuro, Endocrine, Renal, MSK, Derm, ENT, etc....)

Year #3 (August to April) = Diseases/Specialities (varied between 1 month for some areas, to 1 week for others, course topics too numerous to mention here)

Year #4 (Actually 16 months) = Clinical Clerkship. Basically 16 months of learning through the "See one, Do one, Teach one" method, while staying up for 48 hours at a time, and acting as a Scut Monkey for all those above you.

Then you get your MD.

Then you go into a 2-6 year program (FP = 2 years, some of the specialties like CVSurgery can be upward of 6-7 years, most are 4-5 years) where you learn through doing, and through increased levels of responsibility under mentor physicians at hospitals and clinics.

I have no idea how that compares to naturopaths, but I doubt their teaching compares in terms of work volume, intensity, competition, and duration.

TAM:)
 
We had a homoeopath once boasting about how many "years" their course was. Turned out it was part-time, just a handful of weekends a year. The total time came to about a term.

Rolfe.
 
lol...

Age started University = 18
Age entered Medical School = 24
Age finished residency = 30

And I did the short, 2 year FP program.

TAM:)
 
Eos, Bastyr University is considered to be one of the 'best' naturopathic schools in the U.S. and here is there 4-year curriculum. You can also peruse their prerequisites, which aren't as rigorous as those for medical or veterinary school and they also poo-poo entrance examinations. Also bear in mind, that they are taught mostly by other naturopaths as chiropractors are.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom