This section of the book is from the "Handbook of Nature Cure Volume One: Nature Cure vs. Medical Science" book, by John L. Fielder.
Summarising this catalogue of disclaimers, it may be said that the true Nature Cure Practitioner does not make use of any poisons to produce physiological reactions: neither poisons which are openly admitted as such, nor poisons which masquerade as natural and vegetable remedies, nor even poisons administered in doses so fantastically small that they do not even exist. He does not make capital out of the superstitious belief of the ignorant in magic symbols—such as bottles of different hues, smells pleasant and pungent, pills, capsules and powders. He is not interested in shopkeeping—he does not try to persuade his patients that health depends upon special preparations of foods and near-foods. He makes it clear that the most healthful foods are those which have not been prepared or tampered with in any way. He does not practise the witchcraft of those who feed or inject into their patients the most filthy, repulsive, stinking, abominable stuffs that can be found on land or sea. He does not, above all, allow his patient to believe that he, the practitioner, can cure any disease.
He does teach the patient how he, the patient, can correct the mistakes in his way of living. He may help the patient to untie some of the knots which result from a ravelled existence. He knows, and he tells his patient, that disease is a thing which occurs only in unhealthy bodies.
A healthy body can, and does, repair its own deficiencies. That is the essential principle behind all Nature Cure philosophy and practice. Work for a healthy mind in a healthy body and there is no call for remedies, artificial or "natural".
Although we have discussed a varied list of fads and fancies, one quality is common to them all: they are unnecessary and have no place in Nature Cure. In the maintenance of health they are as superfluous as they are an impediment to its re-establishment. Of a few, it may be allowed that they do no physical harm—but even these are guilty of considerable psychological evil. The consumer’s mental attitude is warped by them. Instead of being made aware of his own immediate responsibilities he is lulled into a comforting assumption of childlike innocence and ineffectuality. He is not in any way to blame for the unwholesome state in which he finds himself: he cannot be expected to fact the tasks of self-repair and readjustment. These burdens he hands over the "remedy". And with them go at least a part of his most valuable assets—self-respect and self-reliance.