Volume 37 Issue 1

The credibility of natural medicine has again been raised in the new Netflix series Apple Cider Vinegar, loosely based on the true story of Annabelle Gibson.¹ The series highlights the dangers of misinformation and the exploitation of vulnerable populations, where opinion is often mistaken for fact. In an era where wellness influencers can gain widespread reach with little to no accountability, the debate over the regulation of naturopathy in Australia has intensified. High-profile figures such as Pete Evans, Elle Macpherson and Belle Gibson have promoted unverified natural health treatments, raising concerns about consumer harm and the blurred lines between wellness marketing and evidence-based practice.^2,3 While proponents argue that statutory registration would safeguard the public by setting professional standards, critics fear increased bureaucracy, the erosion of traditional wisdom and a rigid hierarchy that may sideline experienced practitioners.

Opponents of statutory registration argue that increased governance will place an unnecessary administrative and financial burden on practitioners, potentially limiting access to care. Many naturopaths operate as small business owners, and the costs associated with compliance could make services less affordable for patients.⁴ Additionally, formalising a governance structure may fail to respect elder naturopaths and herbalists, whose experiential knowledge forms the backbone of traditional practice.⁵ The concern is that such regulation could prioritise a biomedical model at the expense of the holistic and intuitive aspects of naturopathic care.

However, the need for statutory registration far outweighs these concerns. Without regulation, there is no clear distinction between trained naturopaths and self-proclaimed wellness warriors. This lack of differentiation threatens public safety, as individuals with no formal training can promote unproven and potentially harmful treatments. Regulatory standards would help protect the integrity, reputation, and ethics of the profession by recognising the extensive pharmacological, pathological, physiological, and psychological knowledge gained through naturopathic education and training.⁶ This framework would reinforce evidence-based practice, ensuring that clinical decisions are grounded in established safety and efficacy guidelines rather than anecdotal experience alone.

Proponents also argue that statutory registration could elevate research literacy within the profession, equipping practitioners with the skills to critically assess scientific evidence while preserving naturopathy’s distinct philosophical roots.^4,7  Rather than diminishing traditional knowledge, regulation would integrate it with evidence-based practice, ensuring that practitioners meet rigorous educational and professional standards.^8,9 A structured framework would also enhance naturopathy’s engagement with scientific advancements, strengthening its credibility while maintaining its foundational principles.

While concerns about additional governance are valid, a structured regulatory framework is expected to actually enhance professional autonomy by reinforcing naturopathy’s place within the broader healthcare system.¹⁰ Registration would facilitate collaboration with health professionals, improving the likelihood of naturopaths being integrated into primary healthcare initiatives. This would ultimately expand access to evidence-based natural therapies for patients, while reducing the risk of misinformation-driven health decisions.

Evidence-based naturopathy is not a rejection of tradition but a refinement of it. A profession grounded in holism, plants, optimal health and prevention must be supported by the best available evidence, expert opinions, and patient values—not the persuasive marketing of unqualified influencers. As Hippocrates wisely noted, “Life is short, the art long, opportunity fleeting, experience deceptive, judgment difficult,” underscoring the necessity of rigorous training and critical thinking in healthcare practice.¹¹ The future of naturopathy in Australia depends on its ability to evolve while remaining true to its roots—ensuring both professional integrity and public safety through statutory regulation.

This issue of the journal reflects the vibrant research community within naturopathy, featuring abstracts that will be presented at the Naturopathic Symposium, all peer-reviewed for their relevance and significance to the profession. Additionally, we are pleased to include an invited commentary from Airdre Grant, who explores the critical role of convalescence in the care of our patients as well as ourselves. Rounding out this issue are three original research articles, including a RCT protocol that will examine the effects of mud baths on sympathetic tone in people with diabetes and positive results from a case series describing hot and cold foot baths in patients with peripheral neuropathy. Our third research article reports the results of traditional medicine use by pregnant people in Iran, and highlights very high rates of use. These all contribute to the growing body of evidence supporting naturopathic practice.

Author(s)

Susan Arentz PhD, BHSc(Hons)
Editor, Australian Journal of Herbal and Naturopathic Medicine
PO Box 696, Ashfield, NSW 2131, Australia
Email journal@nhaa.org.au

References

1. Eidell L. Did Belle Gibson Actually Have Cancer? Inside the Apple Cider Vinegar True Story and the Influencer’s Real-Life Disease-Curing Scam. People. February 21, 2025. https://people.com/apple-cider-vinegar-true-story-8786382
2. Trioli V. When Elle Macpherson revealed her ‘heart-led, holistic approach’ to treating cancer, I thought of my nanny. ABC News. September 7, 2024. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-07/elle-macpherson-holistic-approach-breast-cancer-treatment-nanny/104320226
3. Willis O. The Magic Pill: How do the health claims in Pete Evans’ paleo diet doco stack up? ABC News. June 21, 2018. https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2018-06-21/pete-evans-diet-doco-magic-pill-health-claims-evaluated/9891470
4. Canaway R. A culture of dissent: Australian naturopaths’ perspectives on practitioner regulation. Complementary Health Practice Review. 2009;14(3):136−152.
5. Braun L, Spitzer O, Tiralongo E, et al. Naturopaths and Western herbalists’ attitudes to evidence, regulation, information sources and knowledge about popular complementary medicines. Complementary Therapies in Medicine. 2013;21(1):58-64. doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2012.11.008
6. Australian Naturopathic Council. Why do we need registration/regulation of the naturopathic profession in Australia? https://www.naturopathiccouncil.org.au/2020/06/09/why-do-we-need-registration-regulation-of-the-naturopathic-profession-in-australia/
7. Leach MJ, Veziari Y. Evidence implementation in naturopathy: A cross-sectional study of Australian naturopaths. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice. 2023;52:101777.
8. Naturopaths and Herbalists Association of Australia. Regulation of Naturopaths & Western Herblists in Australia. https://nhaa.org.au/who-we-are/why-choose-our-practitioners/regulation-of-practitioners.
9. Ooi SL, Rae J, Pak SC. Implementation of evidence-based practice: A naturopath perspective. Complementary  Therapies in Clinical Practice. 2016;22:24−28. doi: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2015.11.004
10. Carlton A-L. Naturopathy registration research project: an interview with Dr Anne-Louise Carlton. Australian Journal of Herbal and Naturopathic Medicine. 2021;33(1):12−16.
11. Hippocrates. Aphorisms. Section 1: Harvard University Press, 1923.