Missouri Republicans Can't Wait To Let Naturopath 'Doctors' Prescribe Both Crystals *And* Antibiotics
Far too many states already allow this and it needs to end.
Republicans in Missouri are looking to pass a bill that would allow naturopaths to be licensed as real “doctors” in the state, even to the point of allowing them to prescribe actual medicine.
An article published Friday in the Missouri Independent tells the deeply sympathetic-sounding story of Emmalyn Pratt, a lady raised in a family of firefighters who went to naturopathy school in hopes of becoming a doctor so that she could heal first responders like those in her family.
That’s part of the reason she decided to study at the Sonoran University of Health Sciences in Arizona to become a naturopathic doctor — or a primary care physician with a focus on holistic care. Pratt’s dream is to open her own practice in her hometown to, in part, help optimize the health of first responders.
But under current state law, Pratt couldn’t establish that practice in Missouri. Unlike Kansas and 22 other states, Missouri does not have licensing or registration laws for naturopathic doctors.
As well they should not.
What is a naturopathic doctor, you ask? Well, first of all it is not a thing. Second of all, it’s a person who prescribes various snake-oil remedies and treatments for fools who think they are being healthy and all-natural.
In states where the practice of naturopathic medicine is regulated, doctors are required to graduate from accredited four-year residential naturopathic medical programs and pass a postdoctoral board examination in order to receive a license or registration.
Technically, that is true. Ish. In reality, while these programs teach some science-based information, the vast majority of their studies are focused on things like acupuncture, homeopathy, cupping, hydrotherapy, vitamin IVs, and other alternative treatments.
Former naturopath and current naturopath whistleblower Britt Hermes, a graduate of a school in the same network as the one Pratt attended, has written about this “accreditation” before. The fact is, the US Department of Education does not manage accreditation itself, but rather delegates that task to various groups. You know who decides if naturopathy schools are accredited? The Council on Naturopathic Medicine. Very unbiased-sounding organization there!
Because Missouri doesn’t have a licensing program, Pratt could consult with patients, but she couldn’t write prescriptions, order lab tests or many of the other things she’s trained to do.
To be clear, only five of the states that give out licenses to “naturopaths” actually allow them to write prescriptions.
Two Republican lawmakers have proposed legislation to establish that licensing structure in Missouri — state Sen. Nick Schroer of Defiance and Rep. Doug Richey of Excelsior Springs.
Richey said Emmalyn and her father, Kevin Pratt, brought the issue to his attention a couple years ago. He believes the legislation will provide Missourians with more opportunities for quality health care.
“As we continue to talk about the need for more access to healthcare in both rural as well as metro contexts, this is an area of medicine that is known to be effective,” Richey said. “There are other states that have formally recognized it as such.”
In no way is naturopathy “known to be effective” outside of people’s imaginations. I will be more than willing to take that back when they do a double-blind test on homeopathic solutions or when someone successfully overdoses on them, but until then, I am pretty sure it’s all just sugar pills (because it is, literally, just sugar pills).
The article then suggests that licensing naturopaths would help with the physician shortage in the state — which is about as true as saying that someone with a plastic Fisher-Price doctor kit could help with the physician shortage in the state. Although to be fair, your average toddler probably wouldn’t tell someone to put any black salve on a tick bite (do not Google image search black salve), recommend a hydrogen peroxide IV treatment, or prescribe anything else that could cause serious harm.
Naturopathic medicine lends to healing, [Dr. Jamila Owens-Todd] said, despite the demographic or socioeconomic boundaries or the severity of the illness.
And it requires extensive training, she said.
Currently, Hudson said there are numerous people using the title “naturopathic doctor” in Missouri who have not gone through the training that would be required under the licensing framework outlined in the bill.
If the bill passes, those who don’t have the required education will no longer be able to use the title.
“That title protection, that’s the utmost importance for the safety of Missouri,” Hudson said, “so that people don’t have to dig or feel confused about what type of practitioner they’re seeing.”
What difference could there possibly be between a doctor prescribing you sugar pills and someone with a four-year degree in sugar pills prescribing you sugar pills? They are all snake-oil salespeople.
The real confusion to be worried about here is people thinking they’re going to see an actual doctor with actual medical training, walking into their office and seeing the
”doctor” bust out the crystals and calipers.
It’s true that we need more doctors, but we need more actual doctors, not New Age quacks. If that’s the case, why not just bring back barber surgeons so that people can get a perm and an appendix removal at the same appointment? Multi-tasking!
The ability to prescribe actual medicine is particularly dangerous. While you may assume that naturopaths shun regular medicine, that’s not always the case — and there is certainly a tendency to abuse IV antibiotics to treat “chronic Lyme disease.” Chronic Lyme disease is distinct from Lyme disease, untreated Lyme disease and post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome in that it is usually self-diagnosed, does not have any specific symptoms and does not require proof of a current or previous Borealis bacteria infection. Overuse of antibiotics can cause someone to build up a tolerance, rendering them ineffective when later needed — so you really don’t want to take a whole bunch in general, but especially not when you don’t have an actual bacterial infection.
Also dangerous? Naturopaths have a strong tendency to oppose vaccines, which is likely why Republicans love them so much all of a sudden.
Part of the problem with bills like this is that each time one of the schools is “accredited” or a state passes a law allowing naturopaths to call themselves doctors or prescribe medicine, it seems increasingly legitimate, despite there being absolutely no evidence, anywhere, that any of it does jack shit.
This isn’t just about letting people believe what they want if it’s not harming anyone. It is one thing for someone who sincerely believes that water has a memory to go and take homeopathic cold pills, it’s another when someone is not well-informed on the subject and thinks they’re getting regular, effective pills from a regular doctor. It would be even worse if the “doctor” prescribing crystals and snake oil and black salve is the only doctor in their area.
Hopefully these bills will fail, but in the meantime we should actually get on repealing these statutes in the states that currently have them.
PREVIOUSLY:
Can we talk for a moment about how we gate keep the fuck out of CNPs and PAs (and they actually have medical education, training, and board certified) but are allowing Herbal McDipshits to call themselves “doctors” and “treat” people with stuff they find in the woods?
Because I feel a certain kind of way about this.
While we're at it (and apologies to one of my brothers) let's stop treating chiropractors like serious people.