Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 02:57 PM Jan 2014

There is a practical reason why many people turn to naturopaths,

such as those trained by Bastyr University -- a research-based naturopathic university here in Washington -- or other "alternative" providers.




Under our largely organ-based system of medicine, most medical doctors have very little training in nutrition – in general and for specific conditions -- and people correctly understand that our bodies are made out of what we eat and drink. This isn’t “woo.” It’s a fact.

If people can’t get nutrition information and support from their M.D.s, they look elsewhere.

So the medical establishment has itself to blame.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/health/16chen.html

Years later, as a newly minted doctor on the wards seeing real patients, I found myself in the same position. I was still getting a lot of questions about food and diet. And I was still hesitating when answering. I wasn’t sure I knew that much more after medical school than I did before.

One day I mentioned this uncomfortable situation to another young doctor. “Just consult the dietitians if you have a problem,” she said after listening to my confession. “They’ll take care of it.” She paused for a moment, looked suspiciously around the nursing station, then leaned over and whispered, “I know we’re supposed to know about nutrition and diet, but none of us really does.”

She was right. And nearly 20 years later, she may still be.

Research has increasingly pointed to a link between the nutritional status of Americans and the chronic diseases that plague them. Between the growing list of diet-related diseases and a burgeoning obesity epidemic, the most important public health measure for any of us to take may well be watching what we eat.

SNIP

Added Dr. Chauncey: “You can’t just keep writing out script after script after script of new medications when diet is just as important as drugs or any other treatment a patient may be using."

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/83/4/941S.full

By either criterion, less than one-half of the surveyed medical schools (41%) provided the minimum of 25 h of medical nutrition education; compared with the later recommendations of 37–44 h, the percentage of schools meeting the recommendation falls below 20%. This means that roughly 60–80% of schools are teaching far less nutrition than is recommended. In addition, nutrition education typically occurs during the first 2 y of medical school when the basic sciences are being emphasized; nutrition does not appear to get much emphasis during the clinical years when nutrition concepts and skills could be applied more directly to clinical problem-solving. Because the number of schools requiring a nutrition course (32 versus 34) and the overall number of hours of nutrition teaching (23.9 versus 21) has changed little over the past 2 decades, it is not surprising that most medical students continue to assess the time devoted to nutrition as inadequate. From our surveys, it seems that instructors are even more dissatisfied with the hours of nutrition in the curriculum than medical students are. Thus, it appears that we are producing a pool of physicians who feel largely unprepared to counsel their patients about nutrition (6, 10–12) and to make appropriate clinical decisions on nutrition-related issues. Surveys in the literature show that practicing physicians feel inappropriately prepared to address the growing problem of obesity, particularly in children (13, 14). With the rising epidemic of obesity in the US population and the knowledge that prevention is more likely to be successful than treatment, it is clearly imperative to ensure that medical students are adequately prepared.


http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/03/18/long.neglected.nutritional.training.doctors.all.levels.needed.now

The profession must take advantage of changes in medical education to ensure that all health professionals, but especially gut specialists, are given adequate training in nutrition, urge Dr Penny Nield and colleagues, in the launch issue of Frontline Gastroenterology,* the new quarterly companion journal to Gut. Despite its importance to every area of clinical practice - and not just gastroenterology - and a range of policy documents advocating a solid grounding in nutrition dating back several years, it is an area that has "long been notoriously patchy at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels," say the authors from St George's Hospital, London.

Technological advances in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and the emphasis on measurable outcomes have conspired to create "organ specific evidence based medicine" within which "the study, education, and treatment of nutrition in health and disease do not sit comfortably," they write.

The evidence shows that healthcare professionals in general know little about how to assess and manage poor nutrition, and gastroenterologists in particular need to be able to provide advice and expertise in general nutrition, artificial nutrition support, and intestinal failure, they argue.

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

MineralMan

(146,286 posts)
1. Oddly, if I were looking for information on nutrition,
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:02 PM
Jan 2014

I would consult a nutritionist or read books written by nutritionists. I would not consult a naturopath, trained at Bastyr U or anywhere else. I know some naturopaths, including a couple who studied at Bastyr. They are not nutritionists, and have some very odd ideas regarding human nutritional needs.

There are, however, actual nutritionists, whose education is focused in that area only. They write books. Some are available for consultations, as well.

A naturopath is not necessarily a nutritionist, any more than the average MD is.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
2. People don't go to nutritionists as their PCP.
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:07 PM
Jan 2014

But in Washington State, Oregon, Vermont, and other states, a state licensed naturopath could be a PCP.

MineralMan

(146,286 posts)
5. No, why would they?
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:12 PM
Jan 2014

You'd go to one, or a dietician, to consult on nutritional matters. That's their specialty. I don't expect my internist, for example, to be an expert on nutrition. Instead, I read books on that subject, and eat a proper diet (most of the time).

I don't expect a naturopath to be a nutritionist, either. Some might be, but it's not a necessary thing for a naturopath. I know some naturopaths, and I wouldn't follow any diet they recommended, since the ones I know are pretty strange in their dietary preferences.

Here in the Twin Cities and, I expect, in most other larger cities, a search for "nutritionist city" will find several nutritionists or dieticians who are available for consultations. Most of them will even have web pages, where you can see their credentials, etc. A lot of naturopaths have web sites, too, where you can see what areas of focus they have.

There are specialists in many things, and dieticians and nutritionists are specialists, just as my internist is a specialist.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
8. But a sick person wouldn't necessarily know that their condition
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:23 PM
Jan 2014

was triggered or worsened by their food. Not every food-related illness causes obvious GI symptoms. So they wouldn't know to go to a nutritionist in the first place.

If their doctor doesn't have enough training in food-related issues, then the doctor won't be able to properly diagnose that person, either.

For example, suppose a person has developed fibromyalgia. That person wouldn't usually think to go to a nutritionist about this. He'd go to an internist, who might send him to a rheumatologist.

This is what happened to me. All I was offered was pain relievers, and some relief in knowing that my joints were okay, just not my muscles and tendons.

No MD figured out my real problem for years, until new GI symptoms brought me back to the doctor, and those GI problems resulted in blood tests that revealed I was gluten sensitive. The gluten-free diet immediately cleared up the GI problems -- but also the longstanding fibromyalgia.

Going to a naturopath would have considerably shortened the 11 year path it took for me to get a diagnosis (which is par for the course for a Celiac diagnosis, unfortunately.) Because they are familiar with food related conditions -- far more than most M.D.'s.

tkmorris

(11,138 posts)
6. It's possible I don't know enough about Naturopaths
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:13 PM
Jan 2014

However from what I DO know I don't think I'd want one as my PCP.

 

Vashta Nerada

(3,922 posts)
3. Why I would never go to a naturopathic doctor:
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:09 PM
Jan 2014
Naturopathic Practice
Naturopathic practice includes the following diagnostic and therapeutic modalities: clinical and laboratory diagnostic testing, nutritional medicine, botanical medicine, naturopathic physical medicine (including naturopathic manipulative therapy), public health measures, hygiene, counseling, minor surgery, homeopathy, acupuncture, prescription medication, intravenous and injection therapy, and naturopathic obstetrics (natural childbirth).

bold mine
From the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians: http://www.naturopathic.org/content.asp?pl=16&sl=59&contentid=59

If I want advice on nutrition, I'd go see a nutritionist, not a naturopath.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
7. The fact remains.
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:13 PM
Jan 2014

The medical establishment is neglecting important training in nutrition, by their own admission. So they shouldn't be surprised that they are losing some patients to providers who aren't.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
9. Where is your evidence that doctors ARE properly trained in nutrition?
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:25 PM
Jan 2014

You're the one spewing the caca de vaca.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
13. Yes, and I linked to a major study showing that they aren't.
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:31 PM
Jan 2014

You've done nothing but shoot off your mouth.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
10. Bastyr is a joke of a school...
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:26 PM
Jan 2014

they offer a dozen credit courses in homeopathy.

That disqualifies them from having any credibility whatsoever.

Sid

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
12. The University of Washington, the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Hospital,
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 03:30 PM
Jan 2014

and Seattle's major trauma center, Harborview Medical Center, all strongly disagree with you. Their doctors work in research alongside N.P.'s from Bastyr, and in some cases the N.P.'s have dual degrees.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
15. Not according to my state, where they are licensed and work alongside M.D.'s.
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 04:06 PM
Jan 2014

But this discussion has prompted me to look into homeopathy. It turns out that there is research evidence to support it, at least for some conditions.

The fact that we don't know why homeopathy might work doesn't mean that it doesn't work. Many conventional medical treatments are used even though doctors aren't sure why they work.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/homeopathy/ucm1202.pdf

Summary of clinical research in homeopathy to date
5.1 Most comprehensive systematic reviews of RCTs in homeopathy (individualised or standardised treatment) have concluded there is evidence that the homeopathic intervention differs from placebo treatment.
5.2 Condition-specific systematic reviews have indicated effectiveness of homeopathy (individualised or standardised treatment) in childhood diarrhoea, post-operative ileus, seasonal allergic rhinitis, and vertigo. They indicate non-effectiveness in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, delayed-onset muscle soreness, and in prevention of headache and migraine. Findings are non-conclusive for all other conditions that have been the subject of review.
5.3 Homeopathy research has focused on a total of 80 different medical conditions, in which there is a total of 142 peer-reviewed RCTs that met a number of key quality criteria for this overview. Findings in 44% of those RCTs reported positive findings, 8% were negative and 48% were non-conclusive. The majority of trials have examined standardised homeopathy and used placebo-controlled design. There has been replicated RCT research in each of only 28 medical conditions; of those without formal systematic review to date, there is a balance of positive RCT evidence for fibromyalgia and sinusitis.

SNIP

Declaration of interest
The author of this overview is Robert T Mathie PhD, Research Development Adviser, British Homeopathic Association; he is not a homeopathic practitioner. The sole aim of this document is to provide a transparent, balanced and constructive summary of the clinical research evidence in homeopathy.

Oscarmonster13

(209 posts)
16. *ding!*
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 04:50 PM
Jan 2014

You had me at:

Under our largely organ-based system of medicine, most medical doctors have very little training in nutrition – in general and for specific conditions -- and people correctly understand that our bodies are made out of what we eat and drink. This isn’t “woo.” It’s a fact.


I have a chronic autoimmune disease, and supposedly there is no cure. Now while I have to take the allopathic meds to keep it in quasi-remission, I still do an awful lot of stuff to better my condition "on my own"

I have asked to see a nutritionist but it's not covered...have asked to see a physical therapist...not covered. Help with other treatments known to alleviate symptoms (UV), asked if I could pay up front and get reimbursed, not covered.

So this leaves me to my own devices. I have taken the nutrition classes, use my books, see alternative persons (thank goodness most are friends and we can work out trades for visits).

One thing that I wholeheartedly KNOW is that we are organisms, not organ systems...and we have to take that into account and work on health from ALL angles. Nutrition is the HARDEST battle to master, because most of us are so screwed up by our lifetimes of processed foods our ability to know what's normal is skewed.

Not to mention it's personally harder to be "good" when the bad stuff is everywhere and is easier to get a hold of...

anyway, just my 2 cents, fwiw

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
17. Yes -- I have gluten sensitivity that led to some pretty extreme symptoms.
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 04:56 PM
Jan 2014

And along the way learned a lot about auto-immune diseases.

I hope you continue to get the help you need.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»There is a practical reas...