Is the "natural" way better? Why or why not?

I know a lot of people (some here) who believe it’s better to do things the “natural” way. This is often the case in confronting medical issues. People prefer to use the strength of their bodies, such as it may be, instead of being helped by drugs manufactured by the pharmaceutical industry.

I see this often when people are dealing with mental health issues. They’d rather use techniques that they carry with them everywhere, instead of relying on medications to assist the healing process. However, some people go so far as to say that only the body should fight off disease or injuries. God will help you make yourself better without intervention by any medical practice (Christian Scientists).

Similarly, many people prefer their food to be “natural.” No gene modifications or chemicals used to keep bugs away.

This all begs the question of what people mean when they say “natural.” But let’s assume that natural means that there is minimal human intervention in the physical structure of the tool. Thus, if it is a thing, it is something that could be found in nature even if humans didn’t exist. If it is a method or practice, then it requires no equipment save for that which the human body is born with. I.e, no modification of the body in any way by the introduction of manufactured chemicals or mechanical assistance. Chemicals that exist without human intervention or mental techniques are considered “natural.”

So do you think the “natural” way is better? Is it better some of the time, but not all of the time? Under what circumstances is human intervention appropriate? Why or why not do you think there is something wrong with human intervention in some areas?