It is better for the iridologist to refrain from suggesting to a person that he has any particular disease, letting such diagnostics remain the province of licensed doctors.  In so doing, the iridologist will avoid transgressing the law and stepping on the toes of those who are legally qualified to diagnose.

It is indeed unfortunate that one of the greatest pitfalls awaiting the iridologist is the temptation to name diseases.  The feelings of satisfaction and power resulting from conferring a name are deeply rooted in the human psyche.  For example, the Bible tells us that man’s first task on Earth was to name the animals, thus giving him power and dominion over them.

Strong is the temptation to name diseases because nearly everyone has come to expect that his malady has a name.  Patients have come to expect, and doctors have been trained to make, a diagnosis. . . .  “After all,” the patient may reason, “how can you hope to deal with my condition if you aren’t knowledgeable enough to call it by name?”

It is not necessary to name diseases in order to exercise dominion over them. Dr. Bernard Jensen, Visions of Health.

In self defense, I must make it very clear from the first word that hygienists and most other naturopaths of various persuasions, and especially I myself, have never in the past, never!, and do not now, diagnose, treat or offer to cure, disease or illness.  Diagnosis and curing are sole, exclusive privileges of certified, duly-licensed medical doctors and may only be done with a grant of Authority to do so from the State.  Should an unlicensed person diagnose, offer to treat or attempt to cure disease or illness, they will have committed a felonious act.  With big penalties.  Therefore, I do not do it.

When one of my clients comes to me and says that a medical doctor says they have some disease or other, I agree that the medical doctor says they have some disease or other, and I never dare say that they don’t.  Or even confirm on my own authority that I think they do have some disease or other.

What I can legally do for a client is to analyze the state of their body and its organs, looking for weaknesses and apparent allergies.  I can lawfully state that I think their liver tests weak, the pancreas appears not to be functioning well in terms of handling meat digestion, that the kidney is having a hard time of it.  I can say I see a lump sticking out of their body when one is obviously sticking out of their body; I can not say that lump is cancerous but I can state that the cells in that lump test overly strong and that if I myself had a mass of growing cells testing overly strong and if I believed in the standard medical model, then I would be rushing my overly strong testing cells to an oncologist.  But I don’t dare say the person has a cancer.  Or diabetes.  Or is getting close to kidney failure.  That is a diagnosis.