The Naturopathic Principles: What the Profession States and What Critics Say
The six principles naturopathic doctors state, described as the profession words them, then set beside the evidence and the criticisms published by named critics.
Content last updated . This page has not been medically reviewed.
This page is information only. Principles describe an outlook, not a treatment, and they do not tell you whether a particular treatment is safe or works. Serious or worsening symptoms need a doctor first.
Why principles matter
Naturopathic doctors (NDs) often describe their work through a short list of principles. Reading them tells you how the profession explains its approach. It does not test that approach. This page gives each principle as a profession-side source states it, then adds what research or named critics say. Where sources disagree, both are shown and attributed.The profession-side source used here is the Institute for Natural Medicine, a naturopathic-profession body (page updated March 2026). It says six principles guide all aspects of patient care. [1] The main US professional association's own page could not be read when this was written, so wording there may differ.
The six principles, side by side
| Principle | As the profession states it | What research or critics say | Label |
|---|---|---|---|
| First, do no harm | Use the gentlest approaches needed and steer clear of detrimental symptom suppression when feasible. [1] | NCCIH says homeopathy, offered in some naturopathic practices, has little evidence of benefit for any specific condition. [2] Safety depends on the specific treatment, not on the principle. | Statement of intent |
| The healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) | NDs aim to remove obstacles to recovery and support natural recuperative processes. [1] | Critics describe the underlying idea as vitalism, a "life force". [3] One critic argues the "energies" postulated by vitalists cannot be measured by scientific methods. [4] | Traditional framework; not a measured mechanism |
| Identify and treat the causes | NDs seek to identify and address the underlying causes of illness. [1] | NCCIH describes this as a belief that symptoms signal a problem. [5] Whether a given cause is found and fixed has to be tested per condition. See claim check: root cause. | Belief; testable case by case |
| Doctor as teacher | Patient education is a central part of practice. [1] | No study of this principle's effect on outcomes was found in the sources we read. Proper evidence not found. | Statement of intent |
| Treat the whole person | NDs take account of physical, mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, social and other factors. [1] | NCCIH defines whole person health in similar broad terms, so the idea is not unique to naturopathy. [6] See holistic medicine. | Shared concept |
| Prevention | NDs prioritize disease prevention. [1] | The World Health Organization says physical activity contributes to prevention and management of noncommunicable diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, cancer and diabetes. [7] | Established for physical activity; varies for other advice |
The "therapeutic order"
The same profession source describes a "therapeutic order" of seven steps, from removing obstacles to health and stimulating self-healing, through natural substances, to using pharmacologic substances and then high-force interventions. [1] This is a framework for choosing among treatments. It is not evidence that the sequence leads to better results than another approach. No trial of the sequence as a whole was found in the sources we read, so: Proper evidence not found for the order itself (we looked at the profession source, NCCIH and a PubMed search on principles).What critics say
Named critics, writing in consumer-advocacy settings, argue that naturopathy rests on vitalism. A 2013 Quackwatch article by Stephen Barrett, M.D., calls naturopathy a largely pseudoscientific approach. [4] A 2014 Science-Based Medicine post describes vitalism as the central belief. [3] These are opinion and advocacy sources and are quoted here as views, not as findings. They are also several years old.How the profession responds
The Council on Naturopathic Medical Education, which accredits ND programs in the US and Canada, says its programs teach natural modalities as well as biomedical and clinical sciences. [8] The Institute for Natural Medicine itself notes that stronger clinical research is needed for integrative medicine to become a widely adopted model. [1] The profession source therefore acknowledges that research is still needed.How to use this page
When a practitioner says "we treat the root cause" or "we support the body's own healing", ask what the specific test or treatment is, what it is for, and what evidence exists for that use. How to evaluate a therapy claim gives a short checklist. The longer history is at the nature cure roots of naturopathy and the wider debate at criticism of naturopathy and the profession's response.Frequently asked questions
What are the six naturopathic principles?
A profession source lists: first, do no harm; the healing power of nature; identify and treat the causes; doctor as teacher; treat the whole person; and prevention. [1]
Are the principles scientifically proven?
They are not tests of anything. They describe an outlook. Parts overlap with well-supported advice, such as physical activity for prevention, [7] while the idea of a self-healing "life force" is a traditional framework that critics say cannot be measured. [4]
What does "vis medicatrix naturae" mean?
It is the Latin phrase for the healing power of nature, which the profession describes as supporting natural recuperative processes. [1]
Do critics and the profession agree on anything?
The profession source says stronger clinical research is needed. [1] Beyond that, the sources we read do not describe a point of agreement; critics dispute the basis of the approach. [4]
Can I rely on the principles to choose care?
No. Choose care by the specific test or treatment and its evidence. Do not use an unproven approach to postpone seeing your health care provider. [11]
More details: evidence, limits and cautions
The details behind this page: cautions, limits of the evidence and where sources disagree. Open any note to read it.
Where the principles meet real risk
References
- How Natural Medicine Principles Support Whole Person Health, Institute for Natural Medicine (a naturopathic-profession body). Updated 10 March 2026. Read 2026-10-22.
- Homeopathy: What You Need To Know, NCCIH (US). Read 2026-10-22.
- Naturopathy vs. Science: Allergy Edition, Science-Based Medicine (a critic-run blog), 20 March 2014. Read 2026-10-22.
- A Close Look at Naturopathy, Stephen Barrett, M.D., Quackwatch (a critic-run consumer site), 26 November 2013. Read 2026-10-22.
- Naturopathy, NCCIH (US). Read 2026-10-22.
- Complementary, Alternative, or Integrative Health: What’s In a Name?, NCCIH (US). Read 2026-10-22.
- Physical activity, fact sheet, World Health Organization. Read 2026-10-22.
- Council on Naturopathic Medical Education (CNME), accreditor of naturopathic doctoral programs in the US and Canada. Read 2026-10-22.
- Johnson SB et al. Use of Alternative Medicine for Cancer and Its Impact on Survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 2018. Read 2026-10-22.
- Cancer and Complementary Health Approaches: What You Need To Know, NCCIH (US). Read 2026-10-22.
- Are You Considering a Complementary Health Approach?, NCCIH (US). Read 2026-10-22.