Last year, Fikreta Ibrisevic chose a naturopathic quack named Juan Gonzalez to treat her cancer. She had been planning on conventional therapy, but Gonzalez convinced her that “chemo is for losers” and that he could cure her without the toxicity of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. As a result, she died. Her distraught husband Omer Ahmetovic killed the quack. Here’s an update on a truly tragic case that shows why cancer patients should never rely on naturopaths.
Naturopathy is a form of pseudomedicine rooted in vitalism. However, naturopaths delude themselves into thinking they’re science-based. Hilarity always ensues when they make that argument.
The Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians (OncANP) writes a “sttaement of principles” guideline for naturopathic oncology. How can you write a statement of principles for quackery? More importantly, why would a real oncology journal publish it?
Ezekiel Stephan was a toddler who died tragically in 2012 because his parents did not treat his bacterial meningitis with medicine, but rather with quackery. His parents were convicted, then acquitted on appeal. A week ago, his father attacked the Canadian Medical Association for reporting on a petition doctors sent to the court urging that courts overturn the acquittal.
The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health recently released its latest 5 year strategic plan. It’s basically the same as the last strategic plan, but with one new addition. It’s not really a new addition, but it signals a resurrection of an old trope about “integrating” quackery with science-based medicine.