The last word on the naturopathic doctor debate

[Guest guest]

OK, enough already folks! It is time to move on and this is NOT the

Naturopathic Doctor's Debate Forum.

 

I think we have rehashed this subject thoroughly enough now and both

sides have made there points and exhibited their passions, and before

those passions get further out of hand, I am ending this line of

discussion NOW (which means any further posts and I will change the

poster's status to moderated).

 

Now, being the moderator, I get to have the final say:

 

First of all, I agree that having a degree from an accredited school

implies a certain amount of work and dedication as well as certain

knowledge, or credentials if you may. I admire the dedication and work

but am not as impressed with the credentials nearly as much as with

what a person has learned and how they have applied it.

 

It was God (nature if you prefer) who gave us the wonderful plants and

botanicals for natural healing. It was man, through science and

mainstream medicine, trying to play God who gave us the horrible,

dangerous, costly and largely ineffective approved medications now

forced upon us.

 

It was also man who deemed himself authoritative enough to give us

degrees, accredited schools and licensing. Certainly God nor nature

infer no degrees or certificates, and, for that matter, neither has

mankind for the very large majority of the 6000 year history of

natural healing.

 

There have always been charlatans and quacks, licensed or not. They

tend to get sorted out by reputation due to their successes and

failures.

 

What degree did Hippocrates have? And yet he is considered the

greatest physician in history and founded his own medical school

(which would likely be unaccredited today, since Hippocrates believed

in natural healing).

 

As I have pointed out before, there are quality schools that are

unaccredited not because they are diploma mills, but because their

states do not license or recognize natural healing, And, imho, there

are people whose experience and tutelage under the hands of other

naturopathic practitioners give them as much right to call themselves

Doctor as those who have the approved and accredited degrees and licenses.

 

In my opinion, Dr. Lamphier is one such person.

 

I have no problem with differentiating between licensed and unlicensed

doctors, as well as other professions. In some cases, some of us

might prefer the unlicensed professional simply because we disagree

with what is taught and practiced by the licensed professional.

Natural healing is one such area - and the closer it gets to

mainstream medicine, the further many will wish to be.

 

Others are entitled to their own opinions. But from this point

forward, I ask that they keep those opinions private and discuss them

via personal email amongst one another.

 

And just for the record - I do not choose to obtain a diploma mill

degree, get a license or give myself a doctor's title because I do not

practice medicine nor do I feel qualified to call myself a doctor of

anything. I have a hard enough time calling myself an author!

 

Thanks,

 

Tony