This section of the book is from the "Handbook of Nature Cure Volume One: Nature Cure vs. Medical Science" book, by John L. Fielder.
Very few of those who resort to Nature Cure have any previous understanding of the principles involved. It is therefore not surprising that the average layman is unable to distinguish between various methods of therapy. He apparently believes that if a practitioner does not use drugs and medicaments of the usual kinds, or if he instructs his patients not to eat meat, or any other common article of food, or if he makes some mysterious ritual out of what would otherwise appear to be a perfectly simple and insignificant action, then he must be a Nature Cure Practitioner. That this confusion should still be widespread is only partly due to the restricted opportunity which we have for publicising our principles. More positively it is due to such factors as the intentionally misleading claims and implications of patent medicines advertisements and the activities of individuals who are in no way qualified to offer treatment or advice to those in ill-health but who have found it possible to make a living by purveying worthless or damaging preparations, claimed to be "natural" either in origin or in action. The health magazines are overcrowded with noisy claims on behalf of brews, extracts and compounds which will induce "inner cleanliness" or "assist the body in its self-healing effort."
The proprietors of these various medicinal preparations and "health foods" are well aware that people are becoming increasingly suspicious of treatments which run counter to the body’s natural processes, and many of them seek to maintain the confidence of their customers by borrowing the language and arguments of true Nature Cure. The actual preparation may be identical with what it was 20 or 30 years ago, when it was advertised as having a frankly chemical and coercive effect on the body. That matters little: soothing double-talk about "natural action" lulls the customer’s suspicions and promises relief from his miseries in return for mere hard cash. But whether the patient’s belief in the naturalness of the remedy is genuine or merely a lazy or ignorant assumption, the net result is that his picture of Nature Cure is distorted to include the preparation and any physiological effect which may be claimed by the vendor.