Your editorial urging Governor Baker to veto the licensing bill for naturopaths asserts arguments better leveled against traditional medicine. Baker should sign the bill in support of the legitimate health interests of all citizens.

You write, “Critics warn that some naturopathic advice is unproven scientifically . . . and that lobbying efforts are funded partly by vitamin companies.’’ What of drug companies lobbying for traditional drug-heavy treatments? And what of recent studies that show that the placebo effect is real, despite decades of denial by traditional medical practitioners? If these factors don’t disqualify traditional medicine from being licensed, they should not be used to prevent alternative practices from the legitimacy and safety of licensing.

Whatever failings naturopaths might have can best be handled if the field is licensed and regulated, as is the case with traditional doctors.

Should this mean that alternative treatments become covered by private insurance and Medicare reimbursement? That’s a valid question, which deserves to be addressed after licensing.

James S. Berkman

Boston