A Dialogue between Naturopathy and Critical Medical Anthropology

In this commentary, I reflect on the two big ideas that struck me in Baer’s dialogue with his students: the economics of holistic health care practice, and the ideological framing of holistic care by naturopaths having to operate within systems of biomedical dominance. As any colleague of Baer knows, any course taught by him would no doubt assist students in experiencing a shift toward recognizing the benefits of exploring issues of race, ethnicity, gender, class, agency, power differentials, and the ways in which economic frameworks such as capitalism or socialism underpin the development of human illness and wellness. The three students—Cheryl, Rachel, and Greg— all trained naturopaths, acknowledged that the traditional practice of naturopathy places the primary focus on the inherent self-healing capacity of individuals, and historically gives inadequate attention to the cultural and economic forces that shape health, illness, and disease. During the course or in the ensuing dialogue, each student made statements that indicated they were favorably disposed toward CMA’s potential for informing naturopathy. As Greg stated, “CMA can provide naturopathy with a broader and intellectually rigorous framework for viewing the interface of health, society, and culture.” They all expressed regret one way or another that insurance did not reimburse