Interim address:

1250 E. Baseline Rd., Suite 205

Tempe, AZ  85283

Tel: 480-839-2800







February 18, 2011



In accordance with the requirements of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 46, the fifth meeting, of the American Naturopathic Research Institute (ANRI) and the Naturopathic Oncology Research Institute (NORI) and the Institutional Review Board(IRB) was called to order at 11:30 a.m., February 18, 2011 at 1250 E. Baseline Rd., Suite 205, Tempe, AZ  85283.


The following Members were in attendance:

Ms. Elizabeth Enright

Dr. Glenn Ozalan

Dr. Paul Stallone

Dr. Kenneth Lashutka

Dr. Colleen Huber

Jesse Adams

Dr. Phranq Tamburri (not physically present, but electronically present by MP3)


Dr. Huber, the Secretary, opened the meeting by commemorating the one year anniversary of the first meeting.  She pointed out that regular quarterly meetings have been held with 6 to 10 members attending each time, that there are about 15 members total, there are officers, by-laws, and that we have minutes and meeting notes for each of the meetings.  Therefore, these organizations are gaining some legitimacy and credibility.  Although we are not widely known outside of our membership, we now have a basis for applying for grant money for research.


Dr. Huber then suggested that we write grant proposals to apply for research grant money.  Jesse said that we could work towards fundraising activities to raise money for patients needing treatment.

Elizabeth volunteered her skills and experience as a grant proposal writer to get started on this.

There was a suggestion that we get Suzanne Somers involved, as well as Natural Partners and other natural medicine companies.

Dr. Ozalan said that he was unsure of Suzanne Somers’ leanings.  He noted that she never uses the word “naturopathic,” and that she seems to be more associated with MDs who practice alternative medicine.  He noted that naturopathic physicians were the first to develop most of the treatments that the alternative MDs now claim credit for, and that Somers has incorrectly given credit to the latter.   She doesn’t have naturopaths in her books.  Still, she is very high profile and possibly it would be a good idea to try to work with her.

Dr. Stallone brought up the organization Stand Up for the Cure, several celebrities involved in promoting natural medicine, who have acknowledged that conventional cancer treatments do not work.  Get involved with them.

He and Dr. Lashutka commented that we are looking to reach the breaking point for natural medicine to start being more widely accepted.

It was unanimously agreed that any research grant money that comes in to NORI should be allocated to our various clinics in proportion to attendance at these board meetings.  Those with most consistent attendance would be awarded the most.  Those who have only missed one meeting would be eligible for a somewhat lesser amount, two missed meetings, less, etc.


Elizabeth commented that naturopathic research and its funding would bring better, more positive, attention to Arizona than recent events have produced, and would show that there are good things happening here, and that it would take focus off of Tucson shootings, SB1070, etc, by being the Arizona Naturopathic Research Institute, and that if ANRI were to apply for grant money at some point, that this would be an advantage.

Dr. Stallone and Dr. Huber argued that the name American Naturopathic Research Institute would be less tied to geography than Arizona Naturopathic Research Institute and perhaps more likely to be taken seriously and to benefit from a broader membership around the U.S. in the future.

For funds for cancer research, however, we would apply for funding under Naturopathic Oncology Research Institute.

The question of the name of ANRI was put to a vote: Arizona or American Naturopathic Research Institute.

5 – American

1 – Arizona

The institution’s name is therefore hereby “American Naturopathic Research Institute.”


Dr. Tamburri was very ill at the time of the meeting and had previously prepared a MP3 recorded message of 12 minutes to share with us.

In his address, he reaffirmed his commitment to the Patient Bill of Rights as drafted as part of the Informed Consent.  Dr. Tamburri felt that the Patient Bill of Rights is especially important in the current depressed economic climate.  As people lose health insurance and have to pay out of pocket for their health care, they will demand that they have their rights respected by their doctors.

He also mentioned that he thinks that the current legalization of medical marijuana in Arizona should extend to naturopaths, and that we ought to push for that acceptance.

Dr. Tamburri also announced the possibility of his becoming a member of the NPBOMEX (Naturopathic Board of Medical Examiners).  In that case, he would have to resign his membership in our organizations and only participate as a guest, and he declared his intention to regularly attend our quarterly board meetings as a guest if that should happen.


Dr. Huber had prepared a compilation of the various Informed Consent forms that had been submitted on the forum.  Everybody was given a copy of that along with the meeting agenda at the beginning of the meeting.  (A copy of the Informed Consent that was later revised and adopted in this meeting appears at the end of these Minutes.)

Dr. Tamburri and Elizabeth liked the Patient Bill of Rights.  Dr. Huber clarified that it is not law, but has been proposed as law.    Dr. Lashutka likes that it is non-confrontational, saying essentially, “I view you as an equal and I want you to take responsibility for your health.”

Elizabeth liked it as a patient, because it gave the sense of partnership, and empowerment for the patient.

Dr. Stallone noted that shouldn’t there be a separate form for research? The patient consent form is more for treatment.  Therefore, the Informed Consent for research should mention that the data from treatment would be collected for research purposes.

He pointed out that in treating cancer patients, there should be something stating that, by law, our treatments are not approved by the FDA and are considered experimental.

Should we make part of dues having access to informed consent and other forms that have been written up with the help of lawyers?

Dr. Huber disagreed, because the Informed Consent really only needs the two suggested changes.  If we make the two recommended additions, wouldn’t this 5, Informed Consent be adequate for NORI research purposes?  Dr. Huber also noted that we have been addressing the question of Informed Consent for almost a year, and that we need to decide on the matter and put it to rest.  She suggested that a doctor who has used more and different and more extensive Informed Consent forms as prepared by lawyers could certainly use those additionally.  And that this Informed Consent would be a basic Informed Consent for ANRI / NORI purposes, not to exclude the use of additional Informed Consent forms at the discretion of the each doctor.

Dr. Huber wrote and read aloud the two additions as follows, which also appear in the complete Informed Consent at the end of these Minutes.

1.  Although my doctor(s) and I will together choose the best treatments for my health condition and goals, I understand that the results and data therefrom will be used in reporting naturopathic research, as in a case review.

2.  I understand that the FDA does not necessarily approve of any of these treatments.  I further understand that the conventional treatments for cancer are chemotherapy, radiation and surgery.

The Informed Consent with the two additions was voted on and unanimously accepted.


Dr. Stallone asked: How do we get patients to our members to help patients decide who is best to help them? How do we get surgeons, MD’s, etc, to refer people to us when they are diagnosed?  As a board, we could contact oncology and surgical practices giving out lists of NMD’s and get on their lists.  How do we get well-known enough to be put on those lists?  Have to put ourselves out there, give ourselves legitimacy.  Dr. Huber noted that perhaps those same MDs would prefer that we approach them as being a complementary treatment to be done to alleviate symptoms of chemo and/or radiation.  For this to happen, we need good patient flow, and need to be seen as a viable option.

Dr. Stallone and Dr. Huber observed that a problem is that when people’s bodies are beaten up by chemo, tumors are more resistant to natural treatments, it is much harder to get them well again.  So the question is: How do we get them to try us first, before going through chemo, etc.?

Dr. Stallone’s proposal: Go to surgeons/onco’s, and let them know NORI exists.  Let them know that we are all on the same team.  We’re not going to take away their patients, but rather work with them to help the patient.

Dr. dj Lashutka suggested that we write up a letter to send to certain offices.  At least plant the seed in their minds.  Show how we can fit in their paradigm.  Diagnosis, labs, preliminary testing have been done by the time the average patient comes here.  We follow up with labs/imaging to monitor progress.  We cannot reject the whole system, as we utilize many of the same tools.

If we end up going with the letter, Dr. Stallone will draft, Dr. Huber (Jesse) will make up the letterhead.

What route do we take? Should we start by making ourselves known in the naturopathic community? Do we need to let our community know before we start approaching oncologists?  Not really, if we are getting the good results like we are, the oncologists will want to look good by working with us.

Dr. Lashutka said we could expect more of a backlash from our own profession.   Dr. Lashutka noted that as NMD’s treating cancer as the primary treatment, we are frowned on by many in the natural medicine community.  Naturopathic medical education currently alleges and teaches only a supporting role for naturopaths in cancer treatment.   Even in the natural community, what we do is considered ‘alternative’. We are a group within a group.

Dr. Huber noted there may also be the opposite situation of more students wanting to learn what we are doing.

Dr. Stallone said that we would be better off going to the allopathic community first.  There would be much more of a fight for research purposes going through the state board, better to go through friendly oncologists.  However, Dr. Proefrock  has told Dr. Huber that he feels okay with letting NPBOMEX and AANP know we exist.

Try raising money for research and to maintain the unencumbered purity of what we are doing, have one of us teach a course at SCNM.

Dr. Huber said that for the AANP meeting in Phoenix in August, the deadline is March 15th for research presentation applications.  Should we do a submission as a board?  Dr. Huber has a research paper all ready to go regarding data related to natural treatments for cancer.

How do we get more people to come to these meetings? Free dues?  More central location?  Different days, hours, topics?  Portion of grant money awarded to doctors with good attendance.

Dr. Huber suggested that we distribute funds amongst people who need assistance with treatment.  First come, first serve basis for fairness.

Elizabeth will begin to write a grant proposal and let us know how that is coming along in the next meeting.

The next meeting is Friday, May 20th at 12:00.  We will bring in Chipotle’s for lunch next time.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m.

Please see the Informed Consent below that was voted on and adopted at this meeting.


I hereby authorize and direct Dr. __________________, who is a naturopathic physician licensed in the State of Arizona, to do the following:

1)      to consult with me about my health concerns, and

2)      to run laboratory tests and perform physical exams that we discuss and agree on, and

3)      to treat me with naturopathic medicine and/or conventional medicine, as my health condition requires, and as we discuss and agree on over time on a case-by-case basis.

I understand that there may be risks and consequences to my medical treatment, some of which may have never yet been discovered, and that the practice of medicine involves many variables, some of which would be impossible to account for in every situation.   There is no medical procedure in which no complication has ever been reported.  I understand that it is impossible to guarantee the outcome of any medical procedure, and that I have been given no guarantee as to the results that may be obtained. I understand that the FDA does not necessarily approve of any of these treatments.  I further understand that the conventional treatments for cancer are chemotherapy, radiation and surgery.  Although my doctor(s) and I will together choose the best treatments for my health condition and goals, I understand that the results and data therefrom will be used anonymously in reporting naturopathic research, as in a case review.

I & further understand that Dr. ____________ honors the following Patient Bill of Rights. The following list of my rights includes but is not limited to the rights below:

1)      I have the right to seek consultation with any physician(s) of my choice, or refuse the same.

2)      I have the right to medical treatments from my physician(s) on mutually agreeable terms.

3)      I have the right to be treated confidentially, with access to my records limited to those involved in my care or designated by me.

4)      I have the right to use my own resources to purchase the care of my choice.

5)      I have the right to refuse medical treatment, even if it is recommended by my physician or any other physician, hospital or clinic.

6)      I have the right to be informed about my medical condition, and the risks and benefits of treatment and appropriate alternatives.

7)      I have the right to refuse third-party interference in my medical care.

Signature of Patient________________________________            Date: ____________

Patient’s printed name ______________________________