Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: naturopathic training

Bypandamedicine

Thursday, Dec 23, 2004
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: naturopathic training
Posted by J.D. McCoy, ND on 05/01/03 at 08:22 PM
[Reply to This Post]
[Return to RoundTable]
I agree that this is not an issue of superiority (although some may feel that way). The problem is public confusion and the potential for harm. In licensed states, the malpractice record for NDs is impressive. There is a clear record of safety demonstrated by licensed NDs (see Wood Insurance group report and NMIC Review). The main problem is that in areas without licensure, NDs are not given the right to diagnose (whether it is a bacterial upper respiratory tract infection or liver overburden due to exposure to hormones/pesticides) or do appropriate lab work. You have identified the solution- 2 health professions (which can’t have the same name). The problem is that “traditional naturopathy”” does not refelect the historical record of naturopathic medical practice in the United States. So where do you propose it belongs? Based on my investigation of the curriculum covered in correspondence schools, it is much more reflective of a nutritional counsellor. I am interested in hearing your view of what the solution is. I agree with your vision that “”we are just different — much as there are fundamental differences between all of the healing professions be they [MDs, DOs, DCs], or whatever.”” The problem is that you have identified licensed health professions, of which NDs are a part of (in licensed juridictions), with clearly defined scopes of practice (all which include diagnosis).