Thanks Sam.
That would be useful to someone exploring the practice.
But that was not the real point of contention. The contention was whether government gets to decide on its merits and force that decision on everyone.
It wass only Mr, Dieserl's opinion that alternative healing is medical fraud, but he woould bring in government to force his opinion on other using his own brand of pseudo-science as a justification.
While this position is popular with statists and religious fanatics, it is offensive to me and my brand of libertarian thinking.