 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| | | | | | | | | | |
The Philosophy And Practice Of Nature Cure
By: Leah Leneman
Nature Cure is very much in the news these days: not under its own name but
under the umbrella of ‘Alternative Medicine’.
The two are far from synonymous, for that umbrella shelters therapies, which
have no connection with, and would never be countenanced by Nature Cure
practitioners. However, Nature Cure is most emphatically an alternative to
conventional medicine.
The name could be said to define the philosophy, which is quite different from
that of conventional medicine.
This philosophy was formulated in 1912 by James C. Thomson, a naturopathic
pioneer who rapidly developed certain empirical techniques into a complete
therapeutic method or approach, which is now conveniently described as
straight nature cure.
The term ‘straight’ is used in order to distinguish such an approach from that
which employs remedies e.g. herbal, homeopathic, biochemical, vitamin,
hormonal or pharmaceutical preparations.
James C. Thomson was also the founder of the Edinburgh School of Natural
Therapeutics in 1918 with a four-year full-time curriculum and co-founder of
the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths.
Naturopaths do not view the body as a battleground in which hostile germs
and viruses must be vanquished by ever-more-powerful wonder drugs, but as
an organism capable of curing itself if allowed to do so without outside
interference.
Nature itself is the great ‘curer’ but most of us have long since forgotten how
to live in harmony with nature.
The differences between the two approaches may be defined more
specifically. A patient who goes to a doctor will expect the doctor to note his
or her symptoms and to prescribe something to relieve those symptoms.
If the symptoms are relieved then the doctor is considered successful in
vanquishing the enemy. If the patient goes to a naturopath he or she should
not expect symptoms to be the primary concern.
Of course naturopaths are as keen to have their patients feeling better as
doctors are — they wouldn’t be in the business otherwise — but acute
symptoms are regarded not as enemies but as friends, because they act as
signposts to what is really wrong.
Simply relieving (which often means suppressing) symptoms is not a solution
in the long-term, and indeed in certain instances can lead to diseases
becoming chronic.
The naturopath sees his or her role as one of assisting patients to assess
themselves as complete entities rather than as a collection of symptoms, in
order to put right whatever is causing the disease.
It follows from this that Nature Cure provides no quick and easy solutions. It
demands a degree of commitment, which is generally absent in those who
depend on doctors and prescriptions.
The Nature Cure practitioner does not dole out magic remedies: he or she may
require the patient to adopt a completely new lifestyle. The fundamental tenet
of Nature Cure is that a person who lives in accordance with the rules of
nature is likely to be a healthy person.
This philosophy is all very well, some may say, but what do naturopaths
actually do? Basically the approach is three-pronged.
The first prong is nutrition. An organism fed on de-natured, artificially flavored
and colored, highly salted and sugared foods is unlikely to be in the kind of
optimum condition which allows its regenerative abilities to function at their
best.
So the first step in many cases is to re-educate people into better eating
habits. Nature Cure believes that the ideal diet should consist of roughly 60%
vegetables and fruit, 20% protein and 20% starch. (On such a diet
comparatively little extra liquid should be required; nature cure considers
excessive imbibing of fluids a bad thing.)
A proportion of the vegetables should be taken raw as salad each day, and
naturally the starch should all be unrefined whole grains. Nature Cure insisted
that animal fats were harmful to the human body long before conventional
medicine caught up with the idea, and a Nature Cure diet is largely a
vegetarian diet.
The second prong is also physical, but it deals with the externals rather than
with what goes into the body. A program of moderate exercise (walking and
swimming are considered ideal) is seen as an essential prerequisite to good
health.
The exercise should be taken daily, if possible, in order to be of real benefit.
Proper breathing, skincare, posture, even clothing, all come into this category,
for they all make a difference to the state of the whole organism.
Relaxation is of crucial importance. The naturopath can help by means of
massage and gentle manipulation, but the patient must learn what the root of
the problem is in order to correct it.
In many cases the origins of the problem are not really physical but
psychological, and this is the third prong of Nature Cure.
The naturopath tries to help the patient to understand himself or herself a little
better, to comprehend the reasons for a particular behaviour pattern.
Anyone who is unwilling to come to terms with the underlying causes of their
actions is unlikely to find any kind of permanent cure for what is ailing them.
For example, workaholics and over-achievers who feel the need to constantly
push themselves harder than the norm may be compensating for a childhood
when their parents’ approval was always sought but never gained; the result
in adult life may be migraines or other physical problems with no obvious
cause.
Because Nature Cure examines the whole individual rather than just the
symptoms, naturopaths have learnt to recognize links between certain
emotional states or behavior patterns and specific diseases. No one can force
a patient to face unpalatable truths, but warm encouragement will usually
engender trust and honesty.
It is easy enough to see how different Nature Cure is from conventional
western medicine. Of course, in some ways modern medicine has grown
closer to Nature Cure.
For example, it now accepts the importance of exercise, of eating high-fibre
foods, of not smoking, etc. In other ways it has grown further away, with a
degree of specialization, which now occurs, and in the plethora of complex
drugs, which it prescribes.
Yet it is important to stress again that no matter how close or how far apart, the
difference in approach is fundamental. Doctors believe they can cure
patients. Naturopaths believe that all they can do is to create a ‘healing
situation’ in which nature can take its natural course and true healing occur.
Naturopaths obviously accept that there are conditions, which are not
amenable to treatment by Nature Cure.
If surgery is required then clearly a surgeon must perform the operation —
though the patients recovery may well be speeded up by following Nature
Cure principles.
Naturopaths also accept that we all start out with a different genetic
inheritance. One man may abuse his body in every conceivable way yet
appear to enjoy robust health, while another may take every care yet suffer a
series of ailments. Nature Cure does not promise perfection; what it promises
is the realization of the individual’s full potential.
One difficulty, which Nature Cure faces, is that it is so often seen as a last
resort. After a lifetime of unhealthy habits and repeated visits to doctors, a
person may become so desperate he or she will decide to try Nature Cure.
By this time the physical organism may have deteriorated to such an extent
that full health is no longer even a possibility. This said, however, even
patients in the most extreme cases are likely to find that if they eschew their
old habits and adopt a Nature Cure regime they will gradually find at least
some relief.
It will doubtless sound more than a little ironic to say so, but naturopaths
would prefer to see healthy people than sick people.
Persuading people to adopt a lifestyle in line with Nature Cure principles
would be far more effective in improving the nation’s health than treating
patients who have come to Nature Cure in extremis.
Of course naturopaths want to do everything they can to help men and women
who are suffering, but the fact remains that many of them need not have ended
up in such distress had they adopted a different lifestyle much earlier.
To do so, however, would mean accepting responsibility for one’s own health
rather than delegating it to the medical profession.
The fact that alternative medicine is so much in the news these days as a
subject worthy of serious attention is an indication that more and more people
are choosing to do precisely that.
After the glittering promises of the new wonder drugs and a nation cured of all
its ills, disillusionment has set in.
Now is the time for Nature Cure to become more widely known than ever
before, for now people are beginning to understand that health is not
something one can get from a pill: it is something to be worked at with
perseverance. Nature Cure can point the way; the rest is up to us.
By: Leah Leneman Author: Vegan Cooking
Article: The Philosophy and Practice of Nature Cure
www.naturecuresociety.org/philosophy.html
By: Leah Leneman
Nature Cure is very much in the news these days: not under its own name but
under the umbrella of ‘Alternative Medicine’.
The two are far from synonymous, for that umbrella shelters therapies, which
have no connection with, and would never be countenanced by Nature Cure
practitioners. However, Nature Cure is most emphatically an alternative to
conventional medicine.
The name could be said to define the philosophy, which is quite different from
that of conventional medicine.
This philosophy was formulated in 1912 by James C. Thomson, a naturopathic
pioneer who rapidly developed certain empirical techniques into a complete
therapeutic method or approach, which is now conveniently described as
straight nature cure.
The term ‘straight’ is used in order to distinguish such an approach from that
which employs remedies e.g. herbal, homeopathic, biochemical, vitamin,
hormonal or pharmaceutical preparations.
James C. Thomson was also the founder of the Edinburgh School of Natural
Therapeutics in 1918 with a four-year full-time curriculum and co-founder of
the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths.
Naturopaths do not view the body as a battleground in which hostile germs
and viruses must be vanquished by ever-more-powerful wonder drugs, but as
an organism capable of curing itself if allowed to do so without outside
interference.
Nature itself is the great ‘curer’ but most of us have long since forgotten how
to live in harmony with nature.
The differences between the two approaches may be defined more
specifically. A patient who goes to a doctor will expect the doctor to note his
or her symptoms and to prescribe something to relieve those symptoms.
If the symptoms are relieved then the doctor is considered successful in
vanquishing the enemy. If the patient goes to a naturopath he or she should
not expect symptoms to be the primary concern.
Of course naturopaths are as keen to have their patients feeling better as
doctors are — they wouldn’t be in the business otherwise — but acute
symptoms are regarded not as enemies but as friends, because they act as
signposts to what is really wrong.
Simply relieving (which often means suppressing) symptoms is not a solution
in the long-term, and indeed in certain instances can lead to diseases
becoming chronic.
The naturopath sees his or her role as one of assisting patients to assess
themselves as complete entities rather than as a collection of symptoms, in
order to put right whatever is causing the disease.
It follows from this that Nature Cure provides no quick and easy solutions. It
demands a degree of commitment, which is generally absent in those who
depend on doctors and prescriptions.
The Nature Cure practitioner does not dole out magic remedies: he or she may
require the patient to adopt a completely new lifestyle. The fundamental tenet
of Nature Cure is that a person who lives in accordance with the rules of
nature is likely to be a healthy person.
This philosophy is all very well, some may say, but what do naturopaths
actually do? Basically the approach is three-pronged.
The first prong is nutrition. An organism fed on de-natured, artificially flavored
and colored, highly salted and sugared foods is unlikely to be in the kind of
optimum condition which allows its regenerative abilities to function at their
best.
So the first step in many cases is to re-educate people into better eating
habits. Nature Cure believes that the ideal diet should consist of roughly 60%
vegetables and fruit, 20% protein and 20% starch. (On such a diet
comparatively little extra liquid should be required; nature cure considers
excessive imbibing of fluids a bad thing.)
A proportion of the vegetables should be taken raw as salad each day, and
naturally the starch should all be unrefined whole grains. Nature Cure insisted
that animal fats were harmful to the human body long before conventional
medicine caught up with the idea, and a Nature Cure diet is largely a
vegetarian diet.
The second prong is also physical, but it deals with the externals rather than
with what goes into the body. A program of moderate exercise (walking and
swimming are considered ideal) is seen as an essential prerequisite to good
health.
The exercise should be taken daily, if possible, in order to be of real benefit.
Proper breathing, skincare, posture, even clothing, all come into this category,
for they all make a difference to the state of the whole organism.
Relaxation is of crucial importance. The naturopath can help by means of
massage and gentle manipulation, but the patient must learn what the root of
the problem is in order to correct it.
In many cases the origins of the problem are not really physical but
psychological, and this is the third prong of Nature Cure.
The naturopath tries to help the patient to understand himself or herself a little
better, to comprehend the reasons for a particular behaviour pattern.
Anyone who is unwilling to come to terms with the underlying causes of their
actions is unlikely to find any kind of permanent cure for what is ailing them.
For example, workaholics and over-achievers who feel the need to constantly
push themselves harder than the norm may be compensating for a childhood
when their parents’ approval was always sought but never gained; the result
in adult life may be migraines or other physical problems with no obvious
cause.
Because Nature Cure examines the whole individual rather than just the
symptoms, naturopaths have learnt to recognize links between certain
emotional states or behavior patterns and specific diseases. No one can force
a patient to face unpalatable truths, but warm encouragement will usually
engender trust and honesty.
It is easy enough to see how different Nature Cure is from conventional
western medicine. Of course, in some ways modern medicine has grown
closer to Nature Cure.
For example, it now accepts the importance of exercise, of eating high-fibre
foods, of not smoking, etc. In other ways it has grown further away, with a
degree of specialization, which now occurs, and in the plethora of complex
drugs, which it prescribes.
Yet it is important to stress again that no matter how close or how far apart, the
difference in approach is fundamental. Doctors believe they can cure
patients. Naturopaths believe that all they can do is to create a ‘healing
situation’ in which nature can take its natural course and true healing occur.
Naturopaths obviously accept that there are conditions, which are not
amenable to treatment by Nature Cure.
If surgery is required then clearly a surgeon must perform the operation —
though the patients recovery may well be speeded up by following Nature
Cure principles.
Naturopaths also accept that we all start out with a different genetic
inheritance. One man may abuse his body in every conceivable way yet
appear to enjoy robust health, while another may take every care yet suffer a
series of ailments. Nature Cure does not promise perfection; what it promises
is the realization of the individual’s full potential.
One difficulty, which Nature Cure faces, is that it is so often seen as a last
resort. After a lifetime of unhealthy habits and repeated visits to doctors, a
person may become so desperate he or she will decide to try Nature Cure.
By this time the physical organism may have deteriorated to such an extent
that full health is no longer even a possibility. This said, however, even
patients in the most extreme cases are likely to find that if they eschew their
old habits and adopt a Nature Cure regime they will gradually find at least
some relief.
It will doubtless sound more than a little ironic to say so, but naturopaths
would prefer to see healthy people than sick people.
Persuading people to adopt a lifestyle in line with Nature Cure principles
would be far more effective in improving the nation’s health than treating
patients who have come to Nature Cure in extremis.
Of course naturopaths want to do everything they can to help men and women
who are suffering, but the fact remains that many of them need not have ended
up in such distress had they adopted a different lifestyle much earlier.
To do so, however, would mean accepting responsibility for one’s own health
rather than delegating it to the medical profession.
The fact that alternative medicine is so much in the news these days as a
subject worthy of serious attention is an indication that more and more people
are choosing to do precisely that.
After the glittering promises of the new wonder drugs and a nation cured of all
its ills, disillusionment has set in.
Now is the time for Nature Cure to become more widely known than ever
before, for now people are beginning to understand that health is not
something one can get from a pill: it is something to be worked at with
perseverance. Nature Cure can point the way; the rest is up to us.
By: Leah Leneman Author: Vegan Cooking
Article: The Philosophy and Practice of Nature Cure
www.naturecuresociety.org/philosophy.html