Archive: Medical Society Opposes Bill to License Naturopaths

A bill has been introduced in the state Senate that would set standards for licensing of naturopathic “doctors.”

The Pennsylvania Medical Society does not support this bill because it recognizes the practice of naturopathic medicine.

House Bill 1784 was introduced June 29, 2009, by Rep. Joseph Petrarca (D-Armstrong).

 “There can be large differences among naturopathic providers and a lack of scientific data and documentation of the safety and efficacy of naturopathic processes,” Pennsylvania Medical Society Past President Peter S. Lund, MD, testified on a similar bill in 2007.

Most states, including all states bordering Pennsylvania, do not license naturopaths.

Add Your Comments


The Pennsylvania Medical Society encourages lively debate, but please behave courteously and responsibly. Comments that include profanity, personal attacks (including language that could potentially identify an individual), or any other inappropriate, offensive, or illegal material will be removed. For more information, please see our Terms of Use. We do not answer legal questions on line. Members seeking general information about laws and regulations affecting medical practice may call our member resource line, (800) 228-7823.

Display name as (optional):

Comments (max 2000 characters):




Comments: 16


As a practicing Naturopath for the past 30 years. It is no my desire to participate in the use of pharmaceutical medications, or any surgery of any kind. If that is needed we have an excellent list of practitioners that we may referr out to. The scope of our practice is proper foods for individual needs, exercise, water, and other materials that are natural and from food souces. On an occasion some supplements may be needed to support the foods for a short time. I am not and have not been interested in Insurance support, for we really don't need it. This type of practice from Classical and Traditiaonal naturopaths don't need to be given the title physician. I would rather be referred to as a teacher (docere).

Thomas L Mather RND at 2/21/2012 5:06:26 PM


The rights of the citizens of the state of Pensylvania should not be abridged to limint them from a free choice of health care. Naturopathy involves primarily food sourced product as medicine (a la HippocratesO and exercise, which has been enjoined by the Surgeion generals, and clean water. Since food should be free, it is unconsciable for anyone to license such practices.

Thomas Mather at 2/21/2012 4:50:45 PM


I think Naturopaths are educators and teachers and do not need licensing. In addition some Naturopaths discriminate based on training thus there is too much discrepancy regarding traing

Lynn Feinman, ND at 8/1/2011 8:54:17 PM


I fail to understand why the Pennsylvania Medical Society does not support this bill other than the issue of Corporate Greed! The Practice of Classical Naturopathy is recognized at the federal level and is protected under the 9th and 14th amendments of the U.S Constitution.. NOTE: I said ClASSICAL Classical Naturopathy IS different from a Naturopathic Physician. A Classical Naturopath does not proscribe pharmaceutical medications or perform surgery. While a Naturopathic Physician does the same thing as Classical with the addition of Prescribing Pharmaceutical medications and performing minor surgeries. Non the less, Both Classical Naturopaths and Naturopath Physicians are "Doctors" . Why does the term "Doctor" have to be associated with Pharmaceuticals and surgery (Mainly Conventional Medicine) as apposed to Holistic Health, when the word Doctor derives from the Latin word ' Docere' meaning "To Teach". We teach our Clients how to live holistically with a focus on maintaining wellness and disease prevention. searching for the root of the problem for a correction rather than covering it over with Pharmaceuticals. "We the people, by the people and for the People" Have the choice! Holistic health care is growing in popularity. Why? Because people are educating themselves and understanding that there is more than just the conventional method of health care!

Anonymous at 7/14/2011 12:14:38 PM


This is crazy. Patients have the right to choose what kind of doctor they want to see. Currently, without a license most people who want to see a Naturopathic Dr. can't because they can't afford it without help from their insurance. I find this really disturbing. The goverment is not helping us make our own choices!!!!! They are dictating to us. Shame on them!!!!

Tina at 1/14/2011 12:25:01 PM


As a naturopathic medical student about ready to graduate in 7 months, I feel I should clarify our curriculum at the 6 nationally accredited ND schools... First, our training is VERY similar to conventional medical schooling. We (Bastyr University, WA state) work very closely with the University of Washington Medical School, which has been ranked #1 in the country for Primary Family Care Medicine, in both academics and research. The curriculum in the first two years of both disciplines consists of the basic sciences: Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Pathology, Immunology, Embryology, Clinic and Physical Lab Diagnosis, and yes, even Pharmacology. In the final 2 years, we include the more specialized sciences such as urology, gynecology, oncology, etc, in addition to the clinical rotations and grand rounds in all areas of primary care, which include (but not limited to) women's/men's health, maternity, children, walk-in clinic, low-income and elderly care. In addition, we have extensive integrated cancer care connections with the major cancer institutes in the country (CTCA in Philly, OK, IL, WA), and the cancer agencies in the greater Seattle area. Additional modalities of care include intense study (4 yrs) in Botanical medicine, homeopathy and physical medicine, which is where we differ from conventional medicine. Second, with regards to a residency, I am of the mindset that you become the best doctor you can while doing one. There was a comment below that addressed this, and I am in full agreement: if you are residency-trained, you gain autonomy. If not, you work under an MD/DO/DPT, etc. I believe this provides the public more assurance that we are, indeed, fully capable of creating a Ddx, treating, and realizing that when our capabilities have been exhausted, that we refer out. It's not a shame to do so- it proves that we are thinking in our patient's best interests. MD's and DO's do it all the time. Wish I could post so much more- limited space..

Vanessa at 11/17/2010 2:19:13 PM


I think Kevin said it best. Naturopathic medicine is being practiced in PA, and as such must be regulated. If any one says otherwise, they are a diploma mill ND that is unlicenseable (i.e.anonymous at 8/16/2010 6:52:56 AM). ND's medical education at the university level is fairly equivalent to there MD counterparts. The big difference in the fact that ND's do not have a residency requirement. The solution is to write a law that gives residency trained ND's expanded scope, where non-residency trained ND's will have Rx with physician (MD, DO) over sight (like a physicians assistant). *ND's have to be able to ddx in order to pass the boards. (thats just ignorant to say they cant) *All accredited ND schools train there students on EBM, and how to select the best treatment according to the evidence (it is scientific). *access to naturopathic medicine should not be limited to the rich. which is why ND's should be covered under insurance plans, giving every resident equal access to see a quality trained naturopathic physicians.

anonymous at 10/6/2010 5:56:33 PM


Come on people the issue is here to stay. NDs are being used by the public...the real question is authenticity of the practitioner. Meaning many claim natural medical knowledge and NDness but the law is the only thing that can demonstrate appropriate education and clinical capacity. The rest of you complainers about NDs not being real docotrs can continue to complain I think your good at it.

anonymous at 9/28/2010 9:56:42 AM


I oppose the licensing of Naturopaths; because Licensure would mean total control, which would destroy Naturopathic Medicine. I, do, however, believe that Naturopathic and other Alternative practices should be a Choice available to all Pennsylvanians, and be covered by Insurance as an Option. It is Discriminatory not to include Naturopathic and other Alternative Medical Practices. They could require some kind of Waiver for the Patient to sign: "At your own risk" or "Against Medical Advice" if they want to, for those of us who would choose to opt for this type of Coverage.

anonymous at 8/16/2010 6:52:56 AM


As a long-time resident of Pennsylvania, it is with appreciation for Primary Care Physicians' plight that I agree this particular bill should not be supported. A bill that is carefully worded to avoid those situations accepted in Oregon and Washington may ultimately stand a chance of approval. Without farsighted recommendations and with additional research, considering the current state of backlog, gaining feedback from the effects of the recent changes to medical insurance, and approvl from the appropriate medical institutions, the possibility of including NDs under the umbrella of current PCPs is null.

Angel at 6/28/2010 7:08:35 PM


I strongly support this bill. Naturopathy will have a profound effect on lower health care costs in PA and greatly improve the health of our residents.

anonymous at 4/29/2010 11:19:35 AM


I've tried to look at this bill objectively and realistically since an ever increasing percentage of the population uses some form of CAM. I've also done some research on naturopathic training, their scope of practice in other jurisdictions and the methodology of naturopathic practice. My concerns are too many to address in this forum, but I think I must address, at least, their proposed scope of practice here. I just don't see allowing them to perform minor surgery and remove foreign bodies from soft tissues as not practicing medicine. What makes these procedures naturopathic? There definitely seems to be an attempt, in this regard, to unnecessarily broaden their scope of practice in order to lend some legitimacy to their profession. However, how do you justify the creation and maintenance of an entire profession by taking "clippings" of other established professions and combining them into a purported distinct form of medicine? Also, how is allowing naturopaths to perform physical exams and order lab tests and diagnostic studies not practicing medicine? As far as I know there are no strictly "naturopathic" assays, blood chemistries or x-rays. This is overkill because, in general, there is no need to specifically monitor over-the-counter medications, vitamins or herbals (which naturopaths claim have no side effects). This is why these agents have been approved for general use. So, on the one hand, these products are not dangerous yet on the other hand, there needs to be a new profession duly licensed to prescribe, dispense and monitor these therapies in order to protect the public. Speaking of public safety, if naturopaths are allowed to order these tests and discover some MEDICAL abnormality, what are they to do then? From the literature, some suggest that they would refer to a more qualified professional. But, they are not adequately trained in differential diagnosis anyway, so how can we trust they will even recognize that they should refer?

Concerned citizen at 2/24/2010 2:13:22 AM


The fact that the "practice" of naturopathic medicine is largely unscientific is only one aspect of why they should not be liscensed. Honestly, why are they automatically offended by anyone who asks them to prove that their treatments (natural or otherwise)actually work? Their questionable philosophies notwithstanding, the small amount of credible advice and therapies they do offer (i.e diet, exercise and vitamins) are largely common sense, don't require sophisticated medical supervision and do not require any extensive training to understand? In fact, the entire credible aspect of naturopathy is likely encompassed by any physician, nurse, PA or pharmacist practice. Naturopaths are simply seeking a means to have their "services" legitimized and subsequently covered by insurance. What's interesting to me is the fact that naturopaths claim to practice a distinct form of medicine yet they seek to obtain so called conventional practice rights (i.e. prescriptive authority, minor surgery etc.)and insist their training is comparable to that of traditional medical doctors every chance they get. Sounds a lot like trying to practice medicine without having to endure the requisite medical training. That is just dangerous! Also, I just love the argument that oppossing licensure of naturopaths limits citizens' ability to choose their healthcare provider. How? If certain people have been utilizing the services of NDs for so long, then continue to do so. They have not been licensed up to this point (with no untoward effects on the public), so why is it necessary now? As far as I can tell, there is no danger to the public in the capacity in which naturopaths currently practice. A previous commenter even confirmed this when he stated that he has lots of experience with them, obviously unlicensed. If a patient is so devout in his belief in naturopathy, then he should have no problem continuing to pay for these services himself.

anonymous at 2/21/2010 3:55:47 PM


As with other forms of health care currently being debated, I would very much prefer to have a choice in who I see as a practitioner. I have more than 30 years of very, very positive experience with naturopaths and other "alternative" medicine. Therefore, I agree with Kevin's comment: "Estabish a board of naturopathic medicine to regulate the profession the same as all the other professions in Pennsylvania. That is how we protect the public." But, please, do not treat me as a child who cannot make decisions for myself. At 62, I am capable of judging when practitioner knows his or her stuff. Believe me, I have walked out of the offices of so-called regular doctors when I realized that they were (a) guessing, (b) just plain wrong.

Joan at 1/5/2010 12:12:20 PM


What a joke the Pa Med Society has no concern for the public. The regulation of Naturopaths by their own board of medicine is the key. This is more of a political move by the Pa Med Society to block the practice of naturopathic medicine. It's already being practiced in the state underground. Why not protect the public by getting out of the way so this law can eventually pass.

Robert at 1/1/2010 12:04:11 AM


It is the concern of the Pennsylvania Medical Society about the large differences among naturopathic providers that is at the heart of why naturopathic providers need to be licensed. The only way to take steps toward protecting the public from poorly educated naturopaths is to regulate naturopathic medicine via licensure. If we can get past protectionist psychology and the skepticism which naturally accompanies ignorance, then the answer if obvious: Estabish a board of naturopathic medicine to regulate the profession the same as all the other professions in Pennsylvania. That is how we protect the public. Regarding safety and efficacy, naturopathic doctors must be given a scope of practice adequate enough to be responsible at least to the PCP level as they are in other states where their practice acts have been modernized, such as Washington, Arizona, and Oregon. These are the states which have set the modern standard for naturopathic medicine, and should be used by Pennsylvania as a template for a law. The rest is just politics. The fact that some naturopaths choose to do some questionable things is no reason to through the baby out with the bath water. Those doctors can be dealt with by the naturopathic board the same way other medical boards deal with their bad apples. While the money will never be there to provide the same research rigor that is required of new drugs, there is plenty of science to support most established naturopathic practices, especially when integrated to some degree with conventional medicine.

Kevin at 10/27/2009 6:31:58 PM

Last Updated: 2/18/2011
From: 
Email:  
To: 
Email:  
Subject: 
Message: