Should I try and become a Nurse in a Naturopathic Clinic or a Naturopathic Doctor?

Specialties Holistic Nursing Q/A

I am a 21 year old female and have been taking my prerequisites for Nursing. I felt very passionate about my choice, I do really enjoy caring for people and helping people. However, as I got further into my studies, talked to various RNs, and had researched the career for awhile, I realized how horrible our health care system really is in the U.S. I think that we rely too heavily on drugs and intoxicants, therefore I don't want to have to inject people with a bunch of drugs, like nurses have to do sometimes.

My mother in law who is an RN told me that at her hospital 14 patients died in one month due to medical errors(being given the wrong drugs).Then she told me that they actually had someone who's job it was to "erase" the medical error so that it doesn't make the hospital look bad and they never told the patients family. I was horrified. I don't want any part of that.

I believe that an organic diet, exercise, herbal TEAS, meditation, acupuncture, acupressure, Craniospinal therapy, etc. are the best ways of treating and preventing illness. So I have decided that I either want to be a Nurse(and later Nurse Practitioner) who works in a Naturopathic Clinic, or become a doctor who uses natural and alternative . My question is, to become a Naturopathic doctor do you HAVE to go to a special Naturopathic medical school or could you go to medical school and then just start your own Naturopathic practice?

Also, which option sounds best? I know that I would have to have a Bachelor's degree before I could go to med school anyway, so should I just continue on with Nursing and try to get into a Naturopathic Clinic?

Thanks

?

Seriously, this guy is a quack and as far as I am concerned, he has blood on his hands.

And don't forget Budwig, who claims cottage cheese and flaxssed oil (together) can cure cancer ...

Specializes in Neurovascular, Ortho, Community Health.

12345

Specializes in Neurovascular, Ortho, Community Health.
Wow. That is a whole lot of crap in just 5 lines. Yes, alternative "medicine"

is old, so what? Something being old does not make it true or effective. Look up the argument from antiquity. The main reason we live longer than ever before in human history is because science and science-based medicine have made it possible for most of us to make it out of childhood alive, and well into our 70s and 80s.

And I suspect that, yes, many people die while being treated by modern medicine because many, many people have the common sense to seek out modern medicine over quackery. Why? Because it usually works. Does it cure everything? Of course not, and it has never claimed to do so. But it has a track record that trumps any form of quackery out there.

No, the main reason we are living longer is due to the basic concepts of CLEANLINESS that came into play right around the days of good ol' Florence Nightengale. Infectious disease has been the hallmark of demise in pre-Western and historic societies. Prior to modernized standards of infection control, the most "common sense" medical and nursing practices were not so common. Surgeons operated in their DIRTIEST attire, people were not quarantined, etc. Additionally, the European dark ages that preceded her era were a detestably filthy period where people were literally throwing excrement out of windows into Main Street.

So I'd venture to say that changing THOSE types of practices has had far more of an effect on public health than Lipitor ever has or will.

In all honesty, you sound extremely inexperienced and/or like you've never left the bedside and experienced patients outside of a hospital setting. Why don't you go get a case management job and try and help some elderly patients manage their 6 cardiac meds, 4 diabetic meds, 3 arthritis meds, and 2 meds to treat the side effects of the other meds. When you see how many BAND AIDS Western Medicine has neatly doled out to them, I wonder if your haughtiness on the "curative" nature of the allopathic model in any and all circumstances would persist. What a joke.

From EXPERIENCE I have learned that what would have in many cases PREVENTED those people from EVER reaching such advanced stages of their "chronic" diseases (which "curative" Western Medicine could not keep from advancing, oddly enough) more than ANYTHING was good old "CAM," specifically, in the form of whole food nutrition and healthy lifestyle choices.

The Band Aids are an obvious money mill and a symptom of an extremely flawed larger system. They are not "cures," as most "Western" medicines are not (diabetes? cancer? COPD? Asthma? CAD? ---WHERE ARE THE "CURES"?). Funny, last I checked, the only thing that could eradicate diabetes was...you guessed it...."CAM"...in the form of dietary and lifestyle control...same thing with heart disease and HTN in many cases. Additionally, more and more research is PROVING that it is a TOXIC environment that exposes us to CARCINOGENS, which, (duh) cause CANCER (The recent Roundup study being a great example, but just check out Environmental Working Group...there are many, many more such chemicals in our homes)....thereby also illustrating that "CAM" would OBVIOUSLY make SENSE in the form of healthy lifestyle choices, nutritional fortification with antioxidant-rich whole foods, and the minimization of and adaptation to exposure to toxic environments (minimization when possible, adaptation via nutrition and herb supplements to strengthen the immune system and adaptogenic response of your body). Your inability to think critically about the intricacy of the human body, the powerful substances on this Earth, the full spectrum and consequences of the healthcare system, and the tremendous (and effective) role of non-allopathic healing is a hallmark of so many nurses who have become robots in the "people factory," despite the education to the contrary that you received in nursing school.

Nurses are not robots. We do not just push pills like buttons to keep the line going. We are intelligent human beings who are blessed to be a part of an ancient craft with a rich tradition of healing through many avenues. Modern medicine is new to this world (as the name clearly implies); nurses are not. Some of the tools used in our craft may have changed through the ages. Our respect for the importance of the entire human experience should not, so let's not cheapen the experience of our patients by reducing them to products in the "people factory."

Specializes in Reproductive & Public Health.
No, the main reason we are living longer is due to the basic concepts of CLEANLINESS that came into play right around the days of good ol' Florence Nightengale. Infectious disease has been the hallmark of demise in pre-Western and historic societies. Prior to modernized standards of infection control, the most "common sense" medical and nursing practices were not so common. Surgeons operated in their DIRTIEST attire, people were not quarantined, etc. Additionally, the European dark ages that preceded her era were a detestably filthy period where people were literally throwing excrement out of windows into Main Street.

So I'd venture to say that changing THOSE types of practices has had far more of an effect on public health than Lipitor ever has or will.

Is this supposed to be an argument against science based medicine? Science is a never ending process; as we explore and experiment and learn new things, we change our practices. Yes, it took a shockingly long time to get basic principles of hygeine adopted by the medical profession, but that was truly one of the formative changes that turned our concept of medicine on it's head, and helped change medicine into a science driven profession.

From EXPERIENCE I have learned that what would have in many cases PREVENTED those people from EVER reaching such advanced stages of their "chronic" diseases (which "curative" Western Medicine could not keep from advancing, oddly enough) more than ANYTHING was good old "CAM," specifically, in the form of whole food nutrition and healthy lifestyle choices.

The Band Aids are an obvious money mill and a symptom of an extremely flawed larger system. They are not "cures," as most "Western" medicines are not (diabetes? cancer? COPD? Asthma? CAD? ---WHERE ARE THE "CURES"?). Funny, last I checked, the only thing that could eradicate diabetes was...you guessed it...."CAM"...in the form of dietary and lifestyle control...same thing with heart disease and HTN in many cases.

Dietary and lifestyle control are NOT CAM. While it is true that there are some providers who don't take the time to counsel on these measures, every provider worth their salt is well aware of the effect of diet and lifestyle on disease processes. Primary and secondary prevention, in mainstream science based medicine, is heavily invested in dietary and lifestyle modification.

Additionally, more and more research is PROVING that it is a TOXIC environment that exposes us to CARCINOGENS, which, (duh) cause CANCER (The recent Roundup study being a great example, but just check out Environmental Working Group...there are many, many more such chemicals in our homes)....thereby also illustrating that "CAM" would OBVIOUSLY make SENSE in the form of healthy lifestyle choices, nutritional fortification with antioxidant-rich whole foods, and the minimization of and adaptation to exposure to toxic environments (minimization when possible, adaptation via nutrition and herb supplements to strengthen the immune system and adaptogenic response of your body). "

What do you mean by "strengthen the immune system?" That's a common CAM catchphrase that always leaves me scratching my head. Our immune response is an inflammatory process. Chronic immune stimulation is extremely stressful on the body and can lead to disease processes such as atheroscleorosis, not to mention over all increased susceptibility to infection.

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/boost-your-immune-system/

Regardless, no herbal supplements have been shown to "boost" your immune response, whatever that means. Many biological substances can help prevent or treat infection (penicillin, maggots, bacteriophages, honey, to name a few), and these substances are readily adopted and used in science based medicine. We also know that chronic stress and nutritional deficiency can impair the immune response. Again, this is NOT CAM.

I find the insinuation that I am just a "pill pusher" highly offensive. Medication is just one component of the science of medicine. And anyway, what makes an herbal pill any better than a pharmaceutical?! How does that make you any less a "pill pusher"?! You think the Supplement industry isn't as corrupt as big pharma? You don't see a problem with naturopathic/homeopathic "doctors" prescribing remedies that they personally sell and profit from?!

Holy moly... there is an awful lot of ignorance in this thread.

Those of you SO stuck on "evidence" and "science" based information do realize that medicine comes from plants right? Like, you took chemistry right?????? :roflmao:

Anyway... NenaRK, my friend who is an ND was thrilled when she heard I was going to become a FNP. It will compliment a holistic practice in that there is information and capacities that a western medical practitioner is able to administer that some holistic health professionals cannot.

However... with that being said, my background is in Herbalism and Ayurveda, and I am too impatient to finish school to become a physician, so adding the observance of two viewpoints within a practice is key in becoming an FNP... If you do go the nursing route, I strongly suggest taking courses after school which compliment a complimentary approach to care and diagnosis.

On a side note... I am absolutely appalled by the division and ignorance from some of the nurses on this thread. Excusing alternative medicine only makes you appear narrow-minded and inexperienced... not intelligent and humanistic which is what is NEEDED as attributes in good nurses. I am sorry for your patients.

I hope you find some positive insight on this thread NenaRK! Maybe it is best to go the nursing route in order to flush out the naive peoples who have decided to pursue a profession meant for the astute! :yes:

Specializes in Bloodless Medicine, Hospice, Holistic.

I will not go so far to say that those who do not believe in natural treatments are ignorant. There are a number of things that can only be done with modern medicine. A better health care model would be for us to join and not be opposite ends of the health care spectrum.

What if, in doing so, we could have the best health care system in the world. The US is currently the 72 worse and the most expensive.

As a holistic nurse, practicing in the hospital and now in private practice, I applaud the passion of the naysayers. It is the much like the passion teachers taught us that the Earth was flat in grade school. Yet for over 2000 years man has known the Earth was round or even much longer if people were readers of the Bible. Yet the fiction (Washington Irving's the Voyages of Christopher Columbus 1893) became the global urban legend that became a truth in our text books. And we all believed because that is what the books said. Were we ignorant?

Consider Dr. Lind, 1716 -1794. The first to do a clinical trial, discovered and nearly lost his license over trying to help end scurvy. There were those who had similar objections to those found here. Those who repeated his clinical trail and said it would not work, boiled the lemons, destroying the vitamin C. Ooops, a clinical trial / evidence based medicine fail. But, eventually limes became the cure. Were they ignorant or just closed minded?

Lets move ahead to 1977 when Denton Cooley did the first bloodless open heart surgeries. Then Dr. Lapin turned it into a medical specialty.

In the late 90's, when I got into it, it was not uncommon to hear nurses and doctors say, "I don't believe in it (bloodless medicine and surgery)." Yet JAMA and several other publications said every hospital should consider this modality. For me, in case managing over 1000 patients, not one died even with blood counts as low as 2.9 and they got discharged 1/2 to 3 days faster than those who got blood. Evidence based medicine finds that if you get 10 units, you have a 50/50 chance of dying. Is it ignorance, religion or maybe those who do not believe are just Flat Earthers. There was the science this time.

Based on my experience as a bloodless medicine and surgery coordinator and case manager, medicine has become a religion. Thus, the reason for some of the various emotional expressions rather than a honest and critical discussion. Either those who do not want to consider alternatives are looking at medicine as a religion, they still believe the Earth is flat or they have become like the five blind scientist looking at and describing an elephant.

Dr. Goodenough, one of the most prolific writers on blood transfusions in the 1980's became one of the greatest authorities on bloodless medicine and surgery in the 90's. Why did he switch? Was he ignorant before and now saw the light? Or, rather, did he look at the possibilities as a scientist and adjust his thinking?

Now as a holistic nurse (and please note, I was a holistic nurse in the hospital too), I am finding greater success in private practice. If I was a part of helping hundreds then, I am saving lives of thousands today.

And yes, everything I do is evidence based. Someone asked where are the studies. They are there just like the thousands of studies on bloodless medicine and surgery. You will find them if you look.

Rather than being closed minded and critical of anything different, why not like those doctors in the 1700's of Dr. Lind's day, those in the 1990's who became the pioneers of Bloodless Medicine and surgery and now those nurses who are pioneering Holistic (and possibly Naturopathic Nursing), consider, "what if."

What if the 5 blind scientists could all of a sudden see. What if Holistic / Naturopathic and Modern Medicine merged. What if we could make our health care system, the most expensive in the world and ranked the 72nd worst, what if we could make it the best.

I will not go so far to say that those who do not believe in natural treatments are ignorant. There are a number of things that can only be done with modern medicine. A better health care model would be for us to join and not be opposite ends of the health care spectrum.

What if, in doing so, we could have the best health care system in the world. The US is currently the 72 worse and the most expensive.

As a holistic nurse, practicing in the hospital and now in private practice, I applaud the passion of the naysayers. It is the much like the passion teachers taught us that the Earth was flat in grade school. Yet for over 2000 years man has known the Earth was round or even much longer if people were readers of the Bible. Yet the fiction (Washington Irving's the Voyages of Christopher Columbus 1893) became the global urban legend that became a truth in our text books. And we all believed because that is what the books said. Were we ignorant?

Consider Dr. Lind, 1716 -1794. The first to do a clinical trial, discovered and nearly lost his license over trying to help end scurvy. There were those who had similar objections to those found here. Those who repeated his clinical trail and said it would not work, boiled the lemons, destroying the vitamin C. Ooops, a clinical trial / evidence based medicine fail. But, eventually limes became the cure. Were they ignorant or just closed minded?

Lets move ahead to 1977 when Denton Cooley did the first bloodless open heart surgeries. Then Dr. Lapin turned it into a medical specialty.

In the late 90's, when I got into it, it was not uncommon to hear nurses and doctors say, "I don't believe in it (bloodless medicine and surgery)." Yet JAMA and several other publications said every hospital should consider this modality. For me, in case managing over 1000 patients, not one died even with blood counts as low as 2.9 and they got discharged 1/2 to 3 days faster than those who got blood. Evidence based medicine finds that if you get 10 units, you have a 50/50 chance of dying. Is it ignorance, religion or maybe those who do not believe are just Flat Earthers. There was the science this time.

Based on my experience as a bloodless medicine and surgery coordinator and case manager, medicine has become a religion. Thus, the reason for some of the various emotional expressions rather than a honest and critical discussion. Either those who do not want to consider alternatives are looking at medicine as a religion, they still believe the Earth is flat or they have become like the five blind scientist looking at and describing an elephant.

Dr. Goodenough, one of the most prolific writers on blood transfusions in the 1980's became one of the greatest authorities on bloodless medicine and surgery in the 90's. Why did he switch? Was he ignorant before and now saw the light? Or, rather, did he look at the possibilities as a scientist and adjust his thinking?

Now as a holistic nurse (and please note, I was a holistic nurse in the hospital too), I am finding greater success in private practice. If I was a part of helping hundreds then, I am saving lives of thousands today.

And yes, everything I do is evidence based. Someone asked where are the studies. They are there just like the thousands of studies on bloodless medicine and surgery. You will find them if you look.

Rather than being closed minded and critical of anything different, why not like those doctors in the 1700's of Dr. Lind's day, those in the 1990's who became the pioneers of Bloodless Medicine and surgery and now those nurses who are pioneering Holistic (and possibly Naturopathic Nursing), consider, "what if."

What if the 5 blind scientists could all of a sudden see. What if Holistic / Naturopathic and Modern Medicine merged. What if we could make our health care system, the most expensive in the world and ranked the 72nd worst, what if we could make it the best.

Where (and when) the heck did you live where you had grade school teachers telling you the earth was flat????

Specializes in Tele, OB, public health.
Where (and when) the heck did you live where you had grade school teachers telling you the earth was flat????

LOVE this comment LOL

Specializes in Tele, OB, public health.

Holy Moley, Quite the word salad you've got going on here, but I'm gonna attempt to answer it anyhow

I will not go so far to say that those who do not believe in natural treatments are ignorant. There are a number of things that can only be done with modern medicine. A better health care model would be for us to join and not be opposite ends of the health care spectrum

I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you don't actually mean to use the word ignorant as it is actually defined

If you do, IRONY ALERT, but this is a lovely example of the Dunning- Kruger effect, so thank you for illustrating that

What if, in doing so, we could have the best health care system in the world. The US is currently the 72 worse and the most expensive.

And your immediate quick fix answer is integrate CAM? Complex problems do not have quick fix answers, they just don't.

As a holistic nurse, practicing in the hospital and now in private practice, I applaud the passion of the naysayers. It is the much like the passion teachers taught us that the Earth was flat in grade school. Yet for over 2000 years man has known the Earth was round or even much longer if people were readers of the Bible. Yet the fiction (Washington Irving's the Voyages of Christopher Columbus 1893) became the global urban legend that became a truth in our text books. And we all believed because that is what the books said. Were we ignorant?

This Has nothing to do with anything. There are so many logical fallacies in this paragraph it is useless

Your bizarre parallel to the flat earthers is a false dichotomy- not to mention those of use skeptical of non-evidence based practice are actually relying on the science

Your statement about the Bible is straight up confusing and is an appeal to authority- not everyone sees the Bible as an authority on very much

And I don't know what the heck the your nonsense about christopher Columbus et al. is about

attachment.php?attachmentid=19419&stc=1

Consider Dr. Lind, 1716 -1794. The first to do a clinical trial, discovered and nearly lost his license over trying to help end scurvy. There were those who had similar objections to those found here. Those who repeated his clinical trail and said it would not work, boiled the lemons, destroying the vitamin C. Ooops, a clinical trial / evidence based medicine fail. But, eventually limes became the cure. Were they ignorant or just closed minded

The people who tried to repeat Anything Lind may have done did not conduct it correctly if they truly did change the method. Nice try on trying to damn all evidence based medicine based on the shoddy work of a few though

I suggest you look up what "clinical trial" and "evidence based medicine" actually mean as it is clear you do not know

Lets move ahead to 1977 when Denton Cooley did the first bloodless open heart surgeries. Then Dr. Lapin turned it into a medical specialty.

In the late 90's, when I got into it, it was not uncommon to hear nurses and doctors say, "I don't believe in it (bloodless medicine and surgery)." Yet JAMA and several other publications said every hospital should consider this modality. For me, in case managing over 1000 patients, not one died even with blood counts as low as 2.9 and they got discharged 1/2 to 3 days faster than those who got blood. Evidence based medicine finds that if you get 10 units, you have a 50/50 chance of dying. Is it ignorance, religion or maybe those who do not believe are just Flat Earthers. There was the science this time.

And your point is? They were using the best evidence available at the time it sounds like- that is the safe and responsible thing to do

Based on my experience as a bloodless medicine and surgery coordinator and case manager, medicine has become a religion. Thus, the reason for some of the various emotional expressions rather than a honest and critical discussion. Either those who do not want to consider alternatives are looking at medicine as a religion, they still believe the Earth is flat or they have become like the five blind scientist looking at and describing an elephant.

attachment.php?attachmentid=19420&stc=1

Dr. Goodenough, one of the most prolific writers on blood transfusions in the 1980's became one of the greatest authorities on bloodless medicine and surgery in the 90's. Why did he switch? Was he ignorant before and now saw the light? Or, rather, did he look at the possibilities as a scientist and adjust his thinking?

Now as a holistic nurse (and please note, I was a holistic nurse in the hospital too), I am finding greater success in private practice. If I was a part of helping hundreds then, I am saving lives of thousands today.

And yes, everything I do is evidence based. Someone asked where are the studies. They are there just like the thousands of studies on bloodless medicine and surgery. You will find them if you look.

NO NO NO- IF ALL OF THIS EVIDENCE EXISTS IT SHOULD BE A MATTER OF SECONDS FOR YOU TO LINK ONE AND STRENGTHEN YOUR ARGUMENT THIS IS YOUR FALLACY HERE

attachment.php?attachmentid=19421&stc=1

Rather than being closed minded and critical of anything different, why not like those doctors in the 1700's of Dr. Lind's day, those in the 1990's who became the pioneers of Bloodless Medicine and surgery and now those nurses who are pioneering Holistic (and possibly Naturopathic Nursing), consider, "what if."

What if the 5 blind scientists could all of a sudden see. What if Holistic / Naturopathic and Modern Medicine merged. What if we could make our health care system, the most expensive in the world and ranked the 72nd worst, what if we could make it the best.

Specializes in Bloodless Medicine, Hospice, Holistic.

Sorry for the confusion. We were taught in school that the world of the time of Christopher Columbus believed the Earth was flat. While we were taught that they believed that, that is not what they believed. Most people of the time knew it was round, as did Christopher Columbus.

But, I'm curious as your words do not seem to have the compassion or at the least, the respect I would expect from a fellow nurse.

And you make my point. Rather than ranting on the words, lets have a dialogue on how to make things better. I'm sorry, did you have any suggestions on how to improve things? Your rhetoric is brilliant. I cannot hold a match to you. You are surly the superior mind here. You should be very proud of yourself as I am sure you are. You might want to look up what flaming is. It is a form of bullying with words, sometimes over minor differences.

For instance....what is evidence based medicine (and yes, I think I know what it means and is, correct me if I am wrong, but it is...

"an approach to medical practice intended to optimize decision-making by emphasizing the use of evidence from well designed and conducted research." I remember reading one of the first articles on it over, and I may be wrong, 20 years ago. I started using the term in lectures to doctors in numerous countries in this half of the world (North, Mexico, Central and South America). I have to say, Doctors constantly challenge what I say. They are tough too. But they and their words are always framed in a way that shows that they are interested in the science and making things better, not attacking or flaming me the speaker.

And I must say, I have never been treated with such lack of respect by a doctor as you are showing me here, you a fellow nurse.

You no doubt are aware of the risk of distortion of evidence based by vested interests....I think, when these studies go awry, they are sometimes referred to as scientific fraud. They ultimately promote drugs / treatments that profit businesses but offer no real health benefit or may harm people. Of course, you could accuse me of bias, but this and more, actually much more was written by the BMJ. interesting point it made about the problem with the evidence. So much of it is biased and bought and paid for, it waters down your argument a bit.

Also, do you know how much of what we do in the hospital is actually based on evidence based medicine?...more on that in a moment.

And just curious...you spoke of trying to damn all evidence based medicine based on the shoddy work of a few though. You took that a bit out of context, seeing that it was the first clinical trial in history. Your right, clinical trial fraud should not call into question the rest of the science, even if it is bought and paid for by a special interest group. And the about (I stopped counting at) 1000 fraud cases in the past 10 years in the US alone should not call into question the rest....although the BJM suggests otherwise. Of course, like the recent Monsanto Shill Scandal (NY Times), (one even said, "nice shilling for you.") how many get by without ever getting caught.

Second, you speak about CAM like you are a, well, religious zealot. I don't condemn you for your beliefs. I still believe in the doctors I know and work for. They are awesome healers. They are wonderful human beings too. They are also open minded and consider the possibilities. There are things I cannot do that I refer to regular doctors.

Yet it seems like you mock me for my beliefs. When I started in bloodless, there were hundreds of studies if not thousands.

Interestingly, Dr. Richard Spence, one of the pioneers of Bloodless said, "There are no high level studies showing blood saves lives. From the early 1900s to the present, there is not one high level study that showed a blood transfusion saved a life. The high level studies showed the opposite. From any any blood to the more blood given, there was a greater morbidity and mortality." He said that back then, over 20 years ago. Why would doctors refuse to look at the best evidence, what was called back then as the Gold Standard. I'm just curious as you seem to have the answers.

Also, why would JAMA, back then, say every hospital should consider this if it was not....."the best evidence available at the time" and it was not the safe and responsible thing to do?" Maybe Jama did not know what evidence based medicine was? No, that is where I first read about it.

No, no, no, the science was there, few were willing to embrace it because of health care politics. When I started, the hospitals I worked at still followed the 10 30 rule for giving blood. Numerous doctors came up to me asking me to speak to other doctors about what was happening in the rest of the world. Sloan Kettering was not transfusing till Hgb of 6 back then. Did Sloan Kettering have different or even better evidence than we did in the middle of nowhere?

The point is, things have not changed much since Dr. Lind's time, well, except that rather than taking 30 years to make a change, the interval has been cut to 10 to 15 years. And instead of the 10 30 rule which was not based on evidence, it took almost 10 more years to get the triggers to be decided on a case by case basis in hospitals that give transfusions, but it is still 8 in most places. However, a few hospitals in the US almost never give transfusions now because the outcomes are so much better.

So yes, lets get together. According to the European Science Foundation, "New ideas for improvement of clinical treatment are generated in everyday clinical life, and from basic science." What we in the holistic arena are proposing is simply consider the basic science.

Since Bloodless is somewhat mainstream now, I have moved on to one of these new ideas. BTW...there is a documentary from another country on what I do. It interviewed several of the people helped by the alternative treatments I teach, a variation of what is done in the hospital. One who exceeded his expiration date by 15 years and one more recent, sent home with inoperable brain cancer, given 6 months to live. He has exceeded his expiration date by 3 1/2 years so far. His headaches stopped the first night I visited him. He was able to sleep the second night. His eye sight came back 4 days after that and he was able to drive.

I would be curious how you would speak to them. As far as they and the thousand we have helped are concerned, they would not have the quality of life they have, if at all, had it not been for the alternative care.

And as far as combining CAM and Modern Medicine....we are already doing it and seeing dramatic results. We are catching up with other countries who have been doing this for years.

So, are we going to debate words or make a change.

I would prefer to help make the world a bit better rather than tear down someone because they think different than I do.

But the point of this post was to answer the question of becoming a Naturopathic Nurse or a Doctor.

As to the original poster, the Doc I work for is a Naturopathic Doctor. I met him when starting work at a 1000 Bed Teaching / Class III Trauma Hospital. There are only a few in the world this big and he treated patients there.

The exciting thing, seeing cancer patients doing chemo without loosing their hair. And they completed the treatments in half the time combining his treatment with the chemo. On doing more and more holistic nursing, with the incredible outcomes and unlike medical care, there are a lot of studies to back what you do. This is because you will be treating the whole person and not just the symptom. You will not be seeing patients with 10 or more meds (24 was the most I ever saw) where we know that over 10 medications results in 100% having some kind of effect on the others. You will not see doctors take them off all but three and ask, how long will this last? The reply, about six months until they see the various specialists who treat their symptoms. (per a hospitalist)

Mind you, this was the same hospital where doctors called me, a nurse, and had me consult on challenges that current treatments were not working on. They were quite open minded. Where there was not a specific study, there had to be at least common sense science to back the suggestion. It was awesome having doctors ask me how to treat using alternative treatments. I even consulted to hemonks on patients when EPO was not working. And the solution, giving the patient peanut butter and black strap molasses. We now use almond butter instead of peanut butter. We also give vitamin C, B6, B9, and B12. Funny, the latter was on the package insert of EPO...yep, from 20 years ago.

For those concerned about giving black strap molasses without a study, it is an old doctor treatment and a college contacted me as they are doing a clinical trial on it. Interestingly the ESF said in 2010...."the percentage of medical treatments being evidence-based has been growing over the last 50-100 years, but still a great percentage of clinical practice is not fully evidence-based."

So, become a doctor and improve lives and get the studies done so we can move on.

This is an exciting time to be getting started, which ever you choose. Clinical trials are providing new holistic treatments that are quite exciting. One such, fasting, has a few studies that show it has incredible promise for cancer treatments. Both chemo and natural treatments.

Best wishes.

Specializes in Tele, OB, public health.
Sorry for the confusion. We were taught in school that the world of the time of Christopher Columbus believed the Earth was flat. While we were taught that they believed that, that is not what they believed. Most people of the time knew it was round, as did Christopher Columbus.

But, I'm curious as your words do not seem to have the compassion or at the least, the respect I would expect from a fellow nurse.

Wow, did you really just play the "where's your compassion?" card?

Such a petty BS insult to fling

You are not my patient

You are not my colleague or friend

You are someone on a public board, and I am under no obligation to sugar coat things for you

Look up "ad hominem attack" as you are guilty of this here

You can't expect to be taken seriously if you engage in such behavior

And you make my point. Rather than ranting on the words, lets have a dialogue on how to make things better. I'm sorry, did you have any suggestions on how to improve things?

Since you have not specified which "things" need to be improved I'll shall not be so presumptuous as to try to answer this

Your rhetoric is brilliant. I cannot hold a match to you. You are surly the superior mind here. You should be very proud of yourself as I am sure you are. You might want to look up what flaming is. It is a form of bullying with words, sometimes over minor differences.

Translation: You will not attempt to engage in a debate, or are unable to so you will resort to calling me a bully

For instance....what is evidence based medicine (and yes, I think I know what it means and is, correct me if I am wrong, but it is...

"an approach to medical practice intended to optimize decision-making by emphasizing the use of evidence from well designed and conducted research." I remember reading one of the first articles on it over, and I may be wrong, 20 years ago. I started using the term in lectures to doctors in numerous countries in this half of the world (North, Mexico, Central and South America). I have to say, Doctors constantly challenge what I say. They are tough too. But they and their words are always framed in a way that shows that they are interested in the science and making things better, not attacking or flaming me the speaker.

See, how this works is this: You make a claim, you should be able to back up said claim with evidence. If you are unable to do so, have the integrity to admit you are wrong or at least admit the point requires more research. That's not bullying- that is being a responsible practitioner

And I must say, I have never been treated with such lack of respect by a doctor as you are showing me here, you a fellow nurse.

*Yawn* see my comments above about ad hominem attacks

You no doubt are aware of the risk of distortion of evidence based by vested interests....I think, when these studies go awry, they are sometimes referred to as scientific fraud. They ultimately promote drugs / treatments that profit businesses but offer no real health benefit or may harm people. Of course, you could accuse me of bias, but this and more, actually much more was written by the BMJ. interesting point it made about the problem with the evidence. So much of it is biased and bought and paid for, it waters down your argument a bit.

Also, do you know how much of what we do in the hospital is actually based on evidence based medicine?...more on that in a moment.

And just curious...you spoke of trying to damn all evidence based medicine based on the shoddy work of a few though. You took that a bit out of context, seeing that it was the first clinical trial in history. Your right, clinical trial fraud should not call into question the rest of the science, even if it is bought and paid for by a special interest group. And the about (I stopped counting at) 1000 fraud cases in the past 10 years in the US alone should not call into question the rest....although the BJM suggests otherwise. Of course, like the recent Monsanto Shill Scandal (NY Times), (one even said, "nice shilling for you.") how many get by without ever getting caught.

Second, you speak about CAM like you are a, well, religious zealot.

I could easily level the same charge against you, but I do not resort to such pettiness

I don't need to- because the science is on my side- and the science says that to the best of our knowledge, today, most of CAM is utter rubbish

I don't condemn you for your beliefs. I still believe in the doctors I know and work for. They are awesome healers. They are wonderful human beings too. They are also open minded and consider the possibilities. There are things I cannot do that I refer to regular doctors.

Yet it seems like you mock me for my beliefs. When I started in bloodless, there were hundreds of studies if not thousands.

Interestingly, Dr. Richard Spence, one of the pioneers of Bloodless said, "There are no high level studies showing blood saves lives. From the early 1900s to the present, there is not one high level study that showed a blood transfusion saved a life. The high level studies showed the opposite. From any any blood to the more blood given, there was a greater morbidity and mortality." He said that back then, over 20 years ago. Why would doctors refuse to look at the best evidence, what was called back then as the Gold Standard. I'm just curious as you seem to have the answers.

I would like to see some citations about anyone specifically ignoring the best evidence....personal anecdotes are not evidence

Also, why would JAMA, back then, say every hospital should consider this if it was not....."the best evidence available at the time" and it was not the safe and responsible thing to do?" Maybe Jama did not know what evidence based medicine was? No, that is where I first read about it.

No, no, no, the science was there, few were willing to embrace it because of health care politics. When I started, the hospitals I worked at still followed the 10 30 rule for giving blood. Numerous doctors came up to me asking me to speak to other doctors about what was happening in the rest of the world. Sloan Kettering was not transfusing till Hgb of 6 back then. Did Sloan Kettering have different or even better evidence than we did in the middle of nowhere?

The point is, things have not changed much since Dr. Lind's time, well, except that rather than taking 30 years to make a change, the interval has been cut to 10 to 15 years. And instead of the 10 30 rule which was not based on evidence, it took almost 10 more years to get the triggers to be decided on a case by case basis in hospitals that give transfusions, but it is still 8 in most places. However, a few hospitals in the US almost never give transfusions now because the outcomes are so much better.

So yes, lets get together. According to the European Science Foundation, "New ideas for improvement of clinical treatment are generated in everyday clinical life, and from basic science." What we in the holistic arena are proposing is simply consider the basic science.

Since Bloodless is somewhat mainstream now, I have moved on to one of these new ideas. BTW...there is a documentary from another country on what I do. It interviewed several of the people helped by the alternative treatments I teach, a variation of what is done in the hospital. One who exceeded his expiration date by 15 years and one more recent, sent home with inoperable brain cancer, given 6 months to live. He has exceeded his expiration date by 3 1/2 years so far. His headaches stopped the first night I visited him. He was able to sleep the second night. His eye sight came back 4 days after that and he was able to drive.

I would be curious how you would speak to them. As far as they and the thousand we have helped are concerned, they would not have the quality of life they have, if at all, had it not been for the alternative care.

I couldn't give a rat's butt about bloodless surgery either way- evidence and studies show it's the best method? Cool.

It seems that you keep going on and on about it because it is the only point you have with any evidence

And as far as combining CAM and Modern Medicine....we are already doing it and seeing dramatic results. We are catching up with other countries who have been doing this for years.

And I'm perfectly happy to use any CAM that actually is evidence-based

The rest of it is junk science

So, are we going to debate words or make a change.

I would prefer to help make the world a bit better rather than tear down someone because they think different than I do.

But the point of this post was to answer the question of becoming a Naturopathic Nurse or a Doctor.

As to the original poster, the Doc I work for is a Naturopathic Doctor. I met him when starting work at a 1000 Bed Teaching / Class III Trauma Hospital. There are only a few in the world this big and he treated patients there.

The exciting thing, seeing cancer patients doing chemo without loosing their hair. And they completed the treatments in half the time combining his treatment with the chemo. On doing more and more holistic nursing, with the incredible outcomes and unlike medical care, there are a lot of studies to back what you do. This is because you will be treating the whole person and not just the symptom. You will not be seeing patients with 10 or more meds (24 was the most I ever saw) where we know that over 10 medications results in 100% having some kind of effect on the others. You will not see doctors take them off all but three and ask, how long will this last? The reply, about six months until they see the various specialists who treat their symptoms. (per a hospitalist)

Mind you, this was the same hospital where doctors called me, a nurse, and had me consult on challenges that current treatments were not working on. They were quite open minded. Where there was not a specific study, there had to be at least common sense science to back the suggestion. It was awesome having doctors ask me how to treat using alternative treatments. I even consulted to hemonks on patients when EPO was not working. And the solution, giving the patient peanut butter and black strap molasses. We now use almond butter instead of peanut butter. We also give vitamin C, B6, B9, and B12. Funny, the latter was on the package insert of EPO...yep, from 20 years ago.

For those concerned about giving black strap molasses without a study, it is an old doctor treatment and a college contacted me as they are doing a clinical trial on it. Interestingly the ESF said in 2010...."the percentage of medical treatments being evidence-based has been growing over the last 50-100 years, but still a great percentage of clinical practice is not fully evidence-based."

*citation needed

Could not care less about black strap molasses- What I care about is people being swayed into forgoing actual treatment for cancer, in lieu of junk like coffee enemas or being anti-vax

So, become a doctor and improve lives and get the studies done so we can move on.

This is an exciting time to be getting started, which ever you choose. Clinical trials are providing new holistic treatments that are quite exciting. One such, fasting, has a few studies that show it has incredible promise for cancer treatments. Both chemo and natural treatments.

Best wishes.

Wow, whole lot of woo going on here

But, I'm curious as your words do not seem to have the compassion or at the least, the respect I would expect from a fellow nurse.

You should be very proud of yourself as I am sure you are. You might want to look up what flaming is. It is a form of bullying with words, sometimes over minor differences.

Actually, I thought she was challenging the content of your post. Do you always label disagreement as "flaming" and "bullying"? One must swallow everything you say whole just because or they are rude and lacking in compassion?

I thought her post was firm, very blunt even, and made some good points. Although your post was incredibly wordy, you didn't offer much of substance really. Some of it seemed completely unrelated to the topic at hand.

I am stunned that any nurse of any specialty would not enthusiastically embrace the concept of "evidence based" practice. We should all want our practices to be based on actual evidence-evidence gleaned from studies conducted according to principles of the scientific method, whose subjects are chosen randomly using methods which preserve the integrity of the research, which control for confounding variables, and whose results can be replicated in additional studies.

+ Add a Comment