Iridology · Atlas

1. Introduction

Version followed: iridology as the International Iridology Practitioners Association (IIPA) presents "Comprehensive Iridology" and as the Australian Government's Natural Therapies Review evidence evaluation describes it (Bernard Jensen-type zone charts). This guide sets out the psychotherapist's own work alongside the method; the psychotherapist does not perform, sell, interpret, recommend or refer for iris readings. Sections 1–3 describe the method as its own organisations present it; section 4 is the therapist's own work with clients who use it.

What it is. Iridology holds that regions of the iris correspond to organs and body systems, so that the colour, pigment, fibre structure, crypts and rings seen in the iris can be read as signs of the body's condition, constitution and inherited "tendencies". Practitioners look at, or photograph, the iris and compare what they see with a chart that divides the iris into zones; the Bernard Jensen chart and its variants are the most widely used, typically mapping some 80–90 zones [source: NHMRC/Griffith iridology evidence evaluation 2023; Iuliano et al. 2026]. IIPA calls iridology and sclerology (reading the white of the eye) "non-invasive assessment methods" used in holistic practice, and describes the field as an "art and science" [source: IIPA home page].

Origins as sources report them. Ignaz von Peczely, a Hungarian physician, is credited as founder and is reported to have published the first iris chart in 1881; the story that he was prompted by a childhood observation of an owl's injured eye is part of the field's own lore. Nils Liljequist (Sweden) published an iris atlas in 1893; Emanuel Felke linked iris reading to constitutional types in the early 1900s; Bernard Jensen, an American chiropractor, expanded the European charts for the US market from the 1950s [source: Iuliano et al. 2026]. IIPA grew out of the National Iridology Research Association founded in 1982 [source: IIPA History and Vision].

Core idea of change (as practitioners hold it). Iridology is an assessment, not a treatment: practitioners use the reading to identify what they describe as constitutional strengths, weaknesses and tendencies, and then to shape "natural health care programs" (typically diet, lifestyle, cleansing or herbal programmes delivered by the iridologist or a naturopath) [source: IIPA History and Vision]. Jensen proposed that iris nerve fibres reflect tissue changes elsewhere in the body [source: Iuliano et al. 2026]. These are the method's own claims, attributed, not established physiology.

Regulatory status (one line each). UK: no statutory regulation of iridologists [uncertain]; the Advertising Standards Authority and CAP say they have not seen convincing evidence that iridology can diagnose, and treat diagnostic claims and references to serious conditions as likely breaches, including discouraging essential medical treatment (CAP Code rule 12.2) [source: ASA AdviceOnline, Health: Iridology, 2022]. Australia: classed as a complementary therapy with non-medical certification; excluded from private health insurance benefits since 1 April 2019 and re-examined in the Natural Therapies Review 2024 [source: health.gov.au; NHMRC evidence evaluation]; health care workers not registered with Ahpra fall under the National Code of Conduct for health care workers, which bars false claims about curing serious illnesses such as cancer, discouraging other health care, financial exploitation and misleading claims about products, services or qualifications [source: Office of the Health Ombudsman (Qld), National Code summary]. USA: there is no national credentialing system for complementary health practitioners and requirements vary by state and profession [source: NCCIH, Credentialing, Licensing, and Education]; no state licence specific to iridology is known [uncertain].

Evidence status (one line). Blinded diagnostic-accuracy studies since Simon, Worthen and Mitas (JAMA 1979, kidney disease) have found accuracy at about chance, and the 2023 systematic review for the Australian Government concluded, with low certainty, that iridology is not an effective diagnostic tool [source: NHMRC/Griffith 2023; Iuliano et al. 2026, citing Simon 1979, Knipschild 1988, Ernst 2000, Münstedt 2005].

2. Framework

As iridology organisations describe practice [source: IIPA Education, IIPA home; NHMRC/Griffith 2023]:

Who practises it: naturopaths, herbalists, nutrition and other natural-health practitioners, some chiropractors, and stand-alone iridologists. IIPA certifies "Comprehensive Iridology": foundational Levels I and II with an IIPA Certified Instructor or Sanctioned School, then certification requirements set by the Association (active membership, iris evaluations, case studies, anatomy-and-physiology coursework, and a certification examination), then advanced options (Level III, Foundational and Advanced Professional Sclerology, Fellow and Diplomate programmes) and continuing-education units to maintain certification; certified-member certificates carry expiry dates and are renewed through the IIPA continuing-education programme [source: IIPA Education & Professional Development; IIPA certified instructors page; IIPA Join page]. Training hours and exam format are not published on those pages [uncertain]. Members agree to uphold the IIPA Member Code of Professional Ethics [source: IIPA Join page]; what the code says on scope (diagnosing, prescribing, referral) is [uncertain].
What a client experiences (typical, as described): a health and lifestyle history; close inspection of each iris with magnification and light, or high-resolution iris photographs (some services now add software analysis); mapping of observed features (pigment spots, rings, fibre density, crypts, iris colour "constitution" types such as the "lymphatic" or "hematogenic" iris named by IIPA) to chart zones; an explanation of "findings" as constitutional strengths, weaknesses, toxicity or tendencies; and usually a programme of diet, supplements, herbs or cleansing [source: NHMRC/Griffith 2023; Iuliano et al. 2026; IIPA home]. No standard examination protocol is published, and practitioners' readings of the same iris differ [source: Iuliano et al. 2026].
Format: often a one-off reading, sometimes repeated to "track progress" [uncertain]; sold alone or bundled with naturopathic consultations, remote photo readings, or courses.

The psychotherapist's framework alongside it [synthesis]:

Notice and ask (any session): routine, non-judgemental question about complementary health use, including assessments such as iris readings; record it.
Understand (woven into ongoing therapy): what the reading meant to the client, what was said, how they felt, what they plan to do.
Decide (as needed): values-based, informed decisions about any programme or further tests built on the reading, with the client's doctor kept in the loop by consent.
Address the psychological work that the reading touched: health anxiety, somatic preoccupation, eating restriction, grief, family conflict, financial pressure.

Move from 1 to 2 when the client reports a reading or a programme based on one. Move to 3 when a decision with health, money or family consequences is pending. Move to 4 when the reading has triggered or fed a clinical problem. Escalate at any point to risk response (section 4) if medical care is being delayed or stopped, a child or pregnancy is involved, or restriction, purging or exploitation appear.

3. Guiding principles

Curiosity, not verdicts. Ask about iris readings the way you ask about any health practice; the client should leave feeling able to tell you more next time. [synthesis]
Attribute, don't adjudicate. Describe iridology's ideas as the method's ideas ("in iridology, this ring is read as…"); neither assert them nor mock them. [synthesis]
Stay in scope. You do not interpret irises, endorse or disparage named practitioners, recommend, sell or refer for readings, or advise on supplements, herbs or medicines; route medical and medication questions to the doctor or pharmacist. [synthesis]
Facts available, not imposed. When asked, you can say plainly that regulators and systematic reviews have not found iridology able to diagnose disease, and that a reading cannot replace medical tests; you say it once, clearly, and do not campaign. [source: ASA 2022; NHMRC/Griffith 2023] [synthesis on stance]
Diagnosis belongs to medicine. Any symptom or "finding" that worries the client is routed to their GP or doctor; eye symptoms to an optometrist or ophthalmologist. [synthesis]
The client's autonomy and explanatory model are respected. Decisions remain theirs; coercion, shaming and covert persuasion damage the alliance and do not help. [synthesis]
Consent before contact. Speak to the client's doctor, pharmacist or iridologist only with explicit, recorded consent, except where safeguarding law requires otherwise. [synthesis]
Risk overrides neutrality. Delay or abandonment of needed medical care, harm to a child, restrictive eating, or financial exploitation move you from exploring to acting. [source: ASA 2022 on discouraging medical treatment; Iuliano et al. 2026 on delayed diagnosis] [synthesis on response]
Treat the anxiety, not the iris. Where a reading has frightened the client, the target is the anxiety process (reassurance-seeking, checking, catastrophic interpretation), using established health-anxiety methods (Domain II). [synthesis]
No conflicts of interest. You do not sell products, programmes or courses to clients, and you declare any personal or financial tie to complementary practitioners. [synthesis; check the specific provisions of your own profession's code]

4. Intervention inventory

All interventions below are the psychotherapist's own work alongside a client's use of iridology. None involves reading irises or recommending, selling or arranging readings, supplements or programmes. Unless tagged otherwise, the procedures are [synthesis] built on standard psychotherapy practice and on the regulatory and evidence sources cited in sections 1–2.

4.1 Routine, non-judgemental inquiry and recording

Purpose / when: at intake and whenever health, diet or new practitioners come up, so that iris readings and the programmes built on them are visible rather than hidden.
Steps: (1) Ask an open question about all health practices, naming assessments as well as remedies. (2) If an iris reading is mentioned, ask who did it, when, what they were told, and what was recommended (tests, diets, supplements, cleanses, further readings), without probing for product names or amounts. (3) Ask whether their doctor knows. (4) Record neutrally in the notes: "Client reports iridology assessment with a natural-health practitioner; told [summary in client's words]; following [type of programme]; GP aware: yes/no". (5) Revisit at review points.
Example language (illustrative): "Lots of people I see use other kinds of health care alongside their doctor: herbal medicine, readings of various kinds, special diets. Is any of that part of your life at the moment?" / "What did the iridologist tell you they saw?"
Watch for: hesitancy or apology ("you'll think it's silly") suggests the client expects judgement: slow down and thank them for telling you. It is working when clients volunteer updates unprompted.

4.2 Exploring meaning, hopes and the explanatory model

Purpose / when: once a reading is known, to understand what draws the client to it and what it is doing for them psychologically.
Steps: (1) Ask what led them to the reading (unexplained symptoms, frustration with medicine, a friend's recommendation, curiosity, family tradition, community or identity). (2) Ask what the experience was like: being looked at closely, given time, told about their "constitution". (3) Elicit their own model: what they think is wrong, why, and how they expect it to be fixed. (4) Name the needs underneath (being taken seriously, control, hope, an explanation for suffering, distrust after a bad medical experience). (5) Reflect these back without debating the iris model.
Example language (illustrative): "It sounds like the reading gave you something the clinic visits hadn't: someone taking a long look and an explanation that made sense to you. What did that mean to you?"
Watch for: the reading carrying heavy identity weight ("my body is toxic", "I was born weak"); shame about being "fooled" if doubts arise; a sense of being dismissed by doctors, which may need its own work. Working signs: the client talks about the needs, not only the findings.

4.3 Debriefing a reading's "findings"

Purpose / when: when the client was told something alarming or identity-shaping (a "weak" organ, "toxins", inherited tendencies, a future illness).
Steps: (1) Ask them to recount the findings in their words and rate how worried they are (0–10). (2) Separate what was observed ("a mark in this zone") from the interpretation they were given and from the meaning they made of it. (3) Ask what they have done since (searching, checking the body, changing diet, telling family). (4) If they want information, state plainly and once: regulators and systematic reviews have not found that iris readings can detect disease, and a reading cannot rule illness in or out; their doctor can (source: ASA 2022; NHMRC/Griffith 2023). (5) Offer to help them take any real worry to their GP. (6) If worry persists or escalates, move to 4.7.
Example language (illustrative): "So the practitioner pointed to a ring and said it showed your kidneys were under strain. Since then you've been checking your back and reading about kidney failure most nights. Can we look at what that worry has been like?" / "If you'd like to know: when iris readings have been tested against medical tests, they haven't been able to tell who has the illness. That's why the person to check your kidneys is your GP."
Watch for: reassurance-seeking towards you (you become another source of checking); anger if the information feels like an attack: return to 4.2. Working signs: worry rating falls; the client plans an ordinary medical check rather than more readings.

4.4 Informed, values-based decision support

Purpose / when: when a decision with consequences is pending: starting an expensive programme, a restrictive diet or cleanse on the strength of a reading, declining a medical test, or stopping a prescribed treatment.
Steps: (1) Clarify the decision and the options (including doing both, waiting, or seeking a medical opinion first). (2) Help the client gather information from appropriate sources: their doctor or pharmacist for medical facts; regulators' and evidence bodies' plain-language statements for iridology's status. (3) Elicit values: what matters most (health, cost, family, autonomy, belonging). (4) Weigh benefits, risks, costs and reversibility of each option against those values. (5) Check for pressure (from a practitioner, group, family, or you). (6) Let the client decide; record the process. No published decision aid specific to iridology is cited here [uncertain: not verified].
Example language (illustrative): "This is your decision. What I can do is help you look at it from all sides. If you go with the programme, what would you hope for, what would it cost you, and what would you want your doctor to know?"
Watch for: your own urge to persuade; urgency created by the seller ("limited offer", "your condition will worsen"); decisions that stop or delay medical care, which trigger 4.6. Working signs: the client can state their reasons in their own words and has involved their doctor where health is at stake.

4.5 Coordination with the client's doctor, pharmacist or eye-care professional

Purpose / when: when a reading has led to new symptoms of worry, a programme that may interact with medicines or conditions, or a choice to delay tests or treatment; or when real eye symptoms are present.
Steps: (1) Explain why sharing information could help. (2) Obtain explicit, specific consent (who, what, purpose) and record it. (3) Encourage the client to raise it themselves first; offer a short written summary they can take. (4) With consent, contact the GP or prescriber with facts only: the client's reported practices, your psychological concerns (e.g. escalating health anxiety, restrictive eating), and a request for medical review; do not offer opinions on remedies or doses. (5) Route all questions about supplements, herbs or medicine changes to the prescriber or pharmacist. (6) Eye symptoms (pain, redness, visual change, a new spot or change in the iris) go to an optometrist or ophthalmologist: some iris changes are real eye findings, for example pigment changes with certain glaucoma eye drops and the age-related ring around the iris (source: Cambridge Computer Laboratory iridology page). (7) Record the contact and outcome.
Example language (illustrative): "Would it be all right if I let Dr ___ know you've been worried about your liver since the reading, so they can check it properly? I'd only share what we agree." / "Questions about whether those supplements are safe with your tablets are really for your pharmacist; shall we write them down for you to take?"
Watch for: refusal of consent (respect it, keep the door open, act only within safeguarding duties); fear of being scolded by the doctor (rehearse the conversation). Working signs: the medical team knows what the client is doing, and the client feels accompanied rather than reported.

4.6 Recognising and responding to risk

Purpose / when: at any point; iridology itself is non-invasive, but harms arise from what follows a reading. Sources name delayed or missed diagnosis, false reassurance, unwarranted anxiety, unnecessary tests and cost (source: Iuliano et al. 2026), and the ASA treats references to serious conditions in iridology advertising as likely to discourage essential medical treatment (source: ASA 2022).
Steps: screen for and respond to each of these:
- Delayed or stopped medical care: e.g. a reading said to show "no problem" so a lump, bleeding or chest pain goes unchecked; or a prescribed treatment stopped. Respond: state your concern directly, explore the reasons, urge prompt medical assessment, seek consent to contact the GP; if capacity is in doubt or the risk is imminent, follow your service's urgent pathway.
- Restrictive diets, fasting or cleanses built on findings: screen for eating-disorder features (fear of "toxins" driving food rules, weight loss, compensatory behaviours, orthorexic preoccupation with purity) and refer for medical monitoring; see the diet and cleanse guides in this domain and the eating-disorder guides elsewhere in this resource.
- Children: a child whose illness is assessed by iris reading in place of medical assessment, or who is placed on restrictive regimes or deprived of needed medical care, is a safeguarding concern; consult your safeguarding lead and follow local procedures. Children's assent and parents' consent are both needed for any intervention; never name or identify a child outside the record.
- Pregnancy: encourage the client to keep the maternity team informed of any programme.
- Financial exploitation: escalating packages, repeat readings, high-priced supplement regimes, recruitment into training or selling (including multi-level marketing); explore costs and pressure openly.
- Group pressure: communities or online groups where doubting a reading is treated as disloyalty; assess for high-control dynamics and support independent decision-making.
Example language (illustrative): "I want to be straight with you because I care about how this goes: a reading can't tell whether that lump needs treatment. I'd really like you to see your GP this week. Can we work out together how to make that happen?"
Watch for: minimisation, secrecy, a practitioner advising the client not to tell their doctor. Working signs: medical assessment happens; costs are under the client's control.

4.7 Health anxiety arising from "findings" (cross-reference Domain II)

Purpose / when: when a reading has triggered or fed persistent health worry, body checking, reassurance seeking, symptom searching or avoidance.
Steps: (1) Assess with your usual health-anxiety assessment (onset, triggers, safety behaviours, impairment, comorbid depression or panic). (2) Build a shared formulation: the reading as a trigger; catastrophic interpretation of sensations; checking and reassurance (including further readings) as maintaining factors. (3) Use the established cognitive-behavioural methods described in Domain II: psychoeducation, behavioural experiments on checking and reassurance, reducing repeated readings and online searching as safety behaviours, attention training, and work on intolerance of uncertainty. (4) Agree with the GP a plan of appropriate, scheduled medical review rather than ad hoc tests. (5) Avoid becoming a reassurance source; reflect the pattern instead.
Example language (illustrative): "Each time you go back for another reading, the worry drops for a day and then comes back stronger. What if we tested what happens if you don't book the next one for now and we track the worry instead?"
Watch for: genuine new symptoms (always route to medical review, not to exposure); clients who experience the formulation as dismissal of their beliefs. Working signs: reduced checking and seeking, worry ratings falling, life activities returning.

4.8 Somatic symptom presentations and "explanations" for unexplained symptoms

Purpose / when: for clients with persistent bodily symptoms who find in an iris reading the explanation medicine has not given them.
Steps: (1) Validate the reality of the symptoms and the frustration. (2) Explore what the reading's explanation offered (coherence, legitimacy). (3) Build a shared, non-dualistic formulation of symptom maintenance (attention, stress, sleep, activity cycles). (4) Use Domain II approaches for persistent physical symptoms: graded activity, pacing, stress and sleep work, values-based goals. (5) Keep one coordinated medical point of contact, with consent.
Example language (illustrative): "You've been suffering, and you've been looking for someone to explain it. I'm not going to argue with what the reading meant to you. Can we also look at what helps and what makes the symptoms worse day to day?"
Watch for: doctor-shopping and practitioner-shopping; demoralisation. Working signs: functioning improves even if the explanation stays contested.

4.9 Clients who practise, train in or sell iridology

Purpose / when: when iridology is part of the client's work or identity (a practitioner, a student in a certification pathway, a seller of related products).
Steps: (1) Treat it as you would any occupation: explore its meaning, satisfactions and stresses. (2) Do not seek or accept readings, products or course places from the client; decline gifts of readings. (3) If the client's doubts about the method's evidence arise, support exploration of the identity, financial and relational stakes without pushing a conclusion. (4) Where the client's business involves debt, recruitment targets or pressure selling, explore this as you would any financial strain.
Example language (illustrative): "Thank you for offering, but I keep my work with you separate from any services you provide. It protects what we do here."
Watch for: dual-relationship drift; the client recruiting you as a validator or a customer. Working signs: the therapeutic frame stays clear.

4.10 Managing your own stance and conflicts of interest

Purpose / when: throughout; especially if you hold strong personal views for or against complementary health, or have links to practitioners.
Steps: (1) Notice your reactions (contempt, enthusiasm, rescuing) and take them to supervision. (2) Do not sell, recommend or refer for readings or related products. (3) Declare any personal or financial links to complementary practitioners to your employer or professional body as their rules require. (4) Keep within professional ethics on competence, conflicts and avoiding harm; check your own profession's code. [synthesis]
Example language (illustrative, to yourself or in supervision): "Am I curious about this client's choice, or am I trying to win an argument?"
Watch for: sarcasm or eye-rolling in session; collusion with claims you would not make. Working signs: clients disclose freely and decide for themselves.

4.11 Reporting routes and documentation

Purpose / when: when advertising, practice or products linked to a reading are misleading or harmful, or a child or vulnerable adult is at risk. Discuss with the client and, where possible, with their consent; safeguarding duties do not depend on consent.
Steps / routes:
- UK advertising: the Advertising Standards Authority, which has ruled against iridology claims to diagnose conditions and against references to serious conditions likely to discourage essential medical treatment (source: ASA AdviceOnline 2022; a 2015 ASA ruling on a clinic website, as summarised there). Suspected side effects of herbal or homeopathic remedies sold alongside readings: MHRA Yellow Card, open to patients and the public (source: MHRA, Yellow Card scheme guidance). Consumer protection: Trading Standards [uncertain].
- Australia: unregistered practitioners: the state or territory health complaints entity, under the National Code of Conduct for health care workers (in Queensland, the Office of the Health Ombudsman) (source: OHO National Code summary); products: the Therapeutic Goods Administration; consumer issues: ACCC [uncertain]. New Zealand: the Health and Disability Commissioner takes complaints about health providers, including natural-health practitioners; in one published decision it found breaches of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights by an iridologist and natural health practitioner who kept treating a lesion she recognised as possibly cancerous without referring on (source: HDC case note 10HDC00970).
- USA: deceptive health advertising: Federal Trade Commission, which has primary responsibility for health claims in all forms of advertising, with FDA responsible for claims in product labelling (source: FTC, Health Products Compliance Guidance); state attorneys general [uncertain].
- Practitioner's own professional body: e.g. IIPA, whose members agree to uphold its Member Code of Professional Ethics [source: IIPA Join page; the code's content is uncertain].
- Safeguarding: your local children's or adult safeguarding procedures, via your safeguarding lead.
- Documentation: record what was disclosed, risks identified, information given, consent obtained or declined, contacts made and outcomes, in neutral language.
Example language (illustrative): "What happened to you with that clinic worried me. If you'd like, we can look at how to make a complaint; it's your choice, and I'll support you either way."
Watch for: fear of retaliation or shame; reporting without consent where it is not required, which can rupture trust. Working signs: concerns reach the right body; the client feels supported, not used.

5. Handling problems

The sources on iridology do not address psychotherapy; all guidance in this section is [synthesis] unless a source is named.

The client feels judged when you ask. Repair directly: name it, apologise for anything that sounded dismissive, restate that you ask everyone and that their choices are theirs. "(Illustrative) I think my question came across as a test. It wasn't meant to be; I'm interested in everything you're doing for your health."
The client asks you to say whether iridology "works". Answer honestly and briefly with what regulators and reviews have found (no demonstrated ability to diagnose disease: ASA 2022; NHMRC/Griffith 2023), then return to what they want from it. Do not debate repeatedly; if they disagree, note the difference respectfully and move on.
The client asks you to interpret their reading or advise on the programme. Decline the role clearly and route: medical questions to the GP, medicine and supplement questions to the pharmacist or prescriber, eye questions to an optometrist.
Stuck in reassurance loops (repeat readings, asking you whether the finding is serious). Formulate the loop together and use the health-anxiety approach in 4.7; agree a single route for medical questions.
The client refuses medical assessment of a worrying symptom. Explore fears (of diagnosis, of being dismissed, of treatment); use motivational interviewing; offer practical help (rehearsal, a letter, accompanying support); seek consent to involve the GP; if capacity is doubtful or risk is imminent, follow your service's urgent and safeguarding procedures and document.
Overwhelm or panic after alarming findings. Stabilise first (grounding, breathing, sleep), then arrange appropriate medical review so that the question is answered by the right test; avoid offering your own reassurance about the body.
Non-adherence to the agreed plan (e.g. booking another reading after agreeing to pause). Treat it as information about the strength of the anxiety or the pull of the relationship with the practitioner, not as failure; revisit the formulation.
Rupture when you raise risk. Expect it; name the care behind the concern, separate the person from the practice, and invite the client's view of what you got wrong. Keep the safety concern on the table.
Family conflict (relatives mocking or pressuring the client, or the client pressuring relatives, including over a child's care). Hold space for each view in joint sessions where appropriate; keep children's medical needs and safeguarding central.
Regret, shame or anger after a missed or delayed diagnosis. Work with grief and self-blame; avoid "I told you so" framing; support complaints if the client wishes (4.11).
Exploitation or high-control group pressure. Explore costs, contracts and the consequences of leaving; support small independent decisions; involve consumer or safeguarding routes where needed.
Your own frustration or contempt. Take it to supervision; it is a predictable reaction and a risk to the alliance.
Iridology-specific difficulty: "constitution" labels. Being told one has an inherently weak or toxic constitution can become a fixed self-belief. Explore it as a belief with consequences (on mood, food, activity), using cognitive work on core beliefs, while not contesting the client's wider worldview.
Iridology-specific difficulty: technology lending credibility. Software or photographic "analyses" may feel more scientific to clients; sources note that digital imaging can give iridology an unearned look of legitimacy (source: Iuliano et al. 2026). Explore what the technology meant to the client rather than arguing about it.

Sources

Web sources:

Studies cited as reported in the sources above [uncertain: secondary]:

Simon, D. L., Worthen, D. M., & Mitas, J. A. (1979). An evaluation of iridology. JAMA.
Knipschild, P. (1988). BMJ (gallbladder disease).
Ernst, E. (2000). Iridology: not useful and potentially harmful. Archives of Ophthalmology.
Münstedt, K., et al. (2005) (cancer diagnosis).

← Previous · XII-174Holistic nursing Next · XII-177 →Sclerology