naturopathic med school 'diploma mills'

There are currently 11 states in the US that license naturopathic
physicians. To qualify for those licenses you must graduate from one of 4 schools which are 4 year schools.

But in this country there is another type of naturopaths. They
pay money to attend via 'distance learning' and get awarded ND degrees. They can't license these in the 11 states but they have found a new 'loophole'. They license in Washington DC or in Bingham County,Idaho and then they claim to be 'licensed'; both of these places don't require anything more than having a 'diploma' from one of the 'schools'.

Consumers are endangered by this but we have no protection.

Consumer advocate

 

Don't these schools readily offer the opinion that they are not physicians, but rather naturopathic consultants? I have not taken the view that a non-ra degree is worthless. To me, if someon goes through a program, (s)he deserves the rights and privileges of such.

Further, I think that there is a place for these non- accredited schools. Not that I wouldn't rather have them be accredited. But, in this new age of medicine, I think any new pardigm is worth at least looking into. I would have no problem calling a chiropractor or allopathic physician a naturopath if (s)he graduated fron Clayton. Aside from their "Sorted" past, they don't seem to be worthless. In fact, Dr. Linda Rector-Page (a graduate of Clayton) seems to have made a significant contribution to the world of health and nutrition. One of her books is currently being used at UCLA. Her only education comes from Clayton.

Dont get me wrong, I don't that an education from Clayton in any way compares to one from Bastyr. But I think that graduates of both do different things.


Any thoughts?

 

'diploma mill' naturopaths

here are folks identifying themselves as naturopathic physicians who cite Clayton or other non-residential schools....

http://www.findanutritionist.com/practitioners/getoff.html

http://www.powerhealth.net/cv.htm

http://www.healthresearch.com/thiel.htm



My position is that people who are trained via distance education are not trustworthy to do 'emergency care' and it is questionable if they can do 'diagnosis'. I wouldn't want a person,licensed or not,who hadn't been through the testing and training that a Bastayr/National etc. has.

Just my opinion.

 

I agree with you. However, I see no problem with my visiting a naturopathic consultant.

 

seeing a naturopathic 'consultant'

It is an individual call but one has to be responsible for the risk.
It is risky to rely on someone who isn't well trained to tell you how
to fix health problems..sort of like going to a health store and asking the clerk what to do for heart trouble...your call but also your life.

Consumer advocate

 

My position is that people who are trained via distance education are not trustworthy to do 'emergency care' and it is questionable if they can do 'diagnosis'. I wouldn't want a person,licensed or not,who hadn't been through the testing and training that a Bastayr/National etc. has.

An ND can not do diagnosis or emergency care. An ND's position is to educate. With "modern medicine", the MD is quick to write a prescription for an anti-depressant where an ND would take a holistic approach. An ND would examine your life style and treat the problem not the symptom.

http://www.anma.com/

http://www.anmcab.org/

http://www.anmcab.org/certvs.htm

 

Randell's post on ND's

Randell,read the formularly list that Arizona naturopaths use and
tell me that there is no danger.....from opiates on down they prescribe.......

http://www.auditorgen.state.az.us/PAD/pa00-9.htm

 

From my understanding, one must be licensed in Arizona to practice naturopathy. Graduates of 4 years-schools are eligible in Arizona. The website (http://www.auditorgen.state.az.us/PAD/pa00-9.htm) seems to tell me that these graduates of 4 years school and the board are endangering the people in Arizona?

 

Is this "Clayton" school state-licensed? Chadwick University is state-licensed. I received an MBA from Chadwick and hold numerous undergraduate degrees from RA colleges. My MBA has not held back my career. Does Edison State College offer an MBA via DL ? Do most DL programs require a score of at least 50% on the GMAT for admission purposes?

 

What are the opinions of the users on this board of ISIM University www.isim.edu

University of Northern Washington www.unw.edu

Washington International University www.washint.edu


Thank you.

 

I was a patient of a Bastyr grad and I nearly died under his care. What scares me is the extent of the training at a 4-year naturopathic college. It seems to be enough that certain graduates feel they CAN diagnose and treat, which they are not supposed to do in unlicensed states, and which they are doing in licensed states.

My research on 4-year ND colleges, with input from students currently attending a couple of these schools, has uncovered some scary information. I do not believe this training and a license makes them general practitioners, which is the schools' claim.

I used to think the distance learning ND degrees were bogus, but now feel these grads might fill a niche. Since they are not diagnosing (do they teach diagnostic skills at Clayton?), but rather teaching about nutrition, stress reduction and exercise, all of which can complement allopathic care, at this point in my life, I would feel safer. I don't believe grads of these programs go out thinking they are doctors.

 

I'm not a champion for any particular distance study program. However, I do have an interest in Naturopathy. I've studied the issue regarding the 5 regionally accredited schools at length and I have talked with graduates and admissions personnel at these schools. I have determined that these schools are producing Naturopathic Doctors (ND) who believe they are capable of practicing as primary care physicians, when they shouldn't be. There are 12 states that will currently license graduates of these 5 schools as such. They are:
Alaska
Arizona
Connecticut
Hawaii
Kansas
Maine
Montana
New Hampshire
Oregon
Utah
Vermont
Washington
US Territories: Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands

Essentially this means that a licensed ND in one of these states can "legally" treat someone as any other medical doctor would. They can, and do, write prescriptions. They can, and do, perform surgery. And in at least one case, a state licensed ND was doing breast implant surgery.

If it is not apparent, the trouble with this is that the requirements to get in to one of these 5 schools are far below that of any accredited med school in the US. It is the easiest way for virtually anyone with a bachelors degree to become a state licensed physician in 12 states. Over the phone, the admissions advisors at 2 of these schools assured me of my acceptance in to their ND program based solely on the fact that I had a bachelors degree. Further, one told me that their program was "not as rigorous as what the website makes it."

So, why is all this happening you might ask? Well, it is a combination of things. The schools are in it for the money obviously. Doing it for the money isn't really a bad thing. The 12 states are in it for something much different. They are in it for the "doctors." They are in a bad need for primary care physicians. Many towns in these states have resorted to recruiting med students and paying their way through school in exchange for services. It's also interesting that of these 5 schools, they all reside in one of the 12 states that will license their grads.

Unfortunately, the DOE has recognized the accreditor of these 5 schools, the CNME, and in turn opened the door for substandard medicine in 12 states, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. The students and graduates of these schools have been brain washed in to believing that they are primary care physicians when they are not. Groups such as the American Naturopathic Medicine Association (ANMA) and their 2000+ members, many of whom are Allopathic MDs, are not amused.

They ANMA has been against the state licensure of NDs as primary care physicians for the very reasons stated above. These ND-MD-lites are potentially harmful to quality patient care. Beyond that, a true ND leaves surgery and the prescribing of medication to the Medical Doctors. It goes against the traditional grain of what an ND is trained to do....err obviously not at one of the 5 ND-MD-lite schools though, and in one of the 12 states.

In the end, it's illegal for an ND of any school to practice as a primary care physician in 38 states. It shouldn't be legal in the 12 remaining. The only reason it is, is because of a shortage of qualified doctors. It makes no sense why anyone would want to fill those positions with unqualified ones. That is something the ANMA, and their member doctors, have been saying for several years now. Incidentally, the ANMA accepts members from Clayton College of Natural Health, and none from any of the 5 RA CNME schools.

While this may go against the popular grain of this forum, this is just an example of where state licensing and the accreditation standards via an approved DOE organization can be highly flawed. In this case the 12 states and the DOE are clearly not looking out for little old you and me.

 

From my last post, the CNME is a National Accreditor of ND programs for the DOE. I listed the 5 schools as being RA schools.

 

Continued licensing? Not as a physician. That would be true if a Doctor of Naturopathy was indeed a physician, which they are not in most states, and shouldn't be anywhere. As for legal accountability, most states make it illegal for anyone who is not a licensed MD to call themself, and practice as, a physician. So, no problem there.

ND's serve a useful purpose in serving as health and lifestyle consultants, and by providing an alternative to traditional medicine.

It's funny but the distance learning school of Clayton College actually has it right. In my opinion, the 5 accredited schools do not. They are providing a vehicle by which people can become physicians under much less rigor than any medical school; again in my opinion.

 

California now licenses NDs and had to

make concessions for those with distance learning degrees, like those from Clayton. Licensure is being hailed as a victory, but it is a frightening. Stephen Bing, millionaire Hollywood celeb has not only regularly financed Bastyr, but also lined the pockets of Gov. Davis and others in order to get licensing passed.

 

Just a follow up from last yrs' discussion

The Bastyr grad I went to see has since left the country and was under investigation by the Attny. Gen's office. It turns out his "premed" degree was bogus, yet Bastyr admitted him.

As a consumer, I thought I had done enough research and asked the right questions. Apparently I did not. Correspondence with some Bastyr students on another forum revealed they were unhappy with the program, said many classes were "flakey new age crap", the science was not rigorous, and the admissions standards were low. The Amer Naturopathic Physician Association's website sports a chart that compares classes at Bastyr to that of Harvard and Johns Hopkins Med Schools. It looks like they are on a par with the big med school curricula. Is this a lie? As it turns out, in my case, my ND missed things that even NDs specialize in. I can only imagine what a Clayton grad does. If they cannot diagnose and prescribe, and they can only teach about nutrition, exercise, sunlight, water, etc., why pay for a "doctor' degree program?

 

Well, I guess you just presented one of the stronger arguments for continued licensing and legal accountability of professional naturopathic physicians.

 

Re: California now licenses NDs and had to

Talk about frightening: I too have regularly financed Bastyr, and gasp, so has my family, my wife's family, my employer, and my health insurance company. I've also been known to make a political contribution now and then. You know, this democracy stuff really is frightening.

 

I think a little clarity is in order.

With the exception of DC, who apparently had a bunch of idiots passing the regulations, the states that properly license naturopathic doctors have very stringent licensure, require comprehensive examinations, and have a separate licensure board that oversees naturopathic physicians in the same way that regular medical boards oversee medical doctors.

However, all of these states (except for DC) ONLY license naturopathic physicians who have graduated from a properly accredited naturopathic school. There are only four accredited naturopathic schools, none of which are distance-based.

In Arizona, for example, naturopathic doctors are licensed (and properly trained) to be primary care physicians. They can prescribe prescription medications that arise from a natural origin (i.e, Armour Thyroid but not Synthroid, Penicillin-G but not Ampicillin) And I believe they are also permitted to give injections. I've personally worked with several naturopathic doctors (Bastyr and National grads) and found the quality of their knowledge, differential diagnostic abilities, and skill in treating patients to be excellent. I've spoken or worked briefly with dozens of other properly educated naturopathic physicians and found the same
level of quality.

At the same time, I have spoken with dozens of graduates of Clayton, Southwest, Westbrook, and without exception, have found that their level of knowledge is vastly inferior. In most cases, these "doctors" have little or no knowledge of pathology, limited knowledge of biochemistry, very limited background in the pharmacology of the natural medicines they prescribe, and are grossly underqualified even to provide nutritional "counseling." Yet there are dozens of Clayton and Westbrook grads who actively promote their treatment of cancer or other serious illnesses, and do other things that are well beyond the scope of practice for which they should be operating.

As for the Bastyr grad who practically killed someone... I have no doubt this is the case, just as Harvard has graduated its share of quack doctors as well. But Bastyr has an extraordinary reputation for quality, rigorous naturopathic education, good academic research, and good clinics.

This is the problem with the field. The lobbyist, Boyd Landry, behind the fake grassroots organization promoting the agenda of the less-than-wonderful programs has a tremendous amount of cash behind him which is apparently supplied directly by the unwonderful schools that lose big each time a state goes to licensure. Landry is masterful at blowing smoke up the collective asses of legislators, claiming that naturopaths from bogus schools "don't prescribe or treat" and "aren't practicing medicine." It's not true, and it's extremely dangerous for the public, who generally believes that anyone holding him or herself out as a "doctor" is qualified to treat... and, of course, the fake naturopaths don't bother to tell anyone that they can't diagnose or treat.

And until all 50 states have strong licensure laws that restrict the fake naturopaths from practicing, this problem will continue to exist.