GP with interest in alternative medicine?

maireann wrote: »

Hey, I'm looking for a GP in Dublin 6/6W who wouldn't be big into antibiotics first thing, but rather going the herbal route. It's funny how health care professionals here are either or... Do you know of anybody out there who has trained in conventional medicine but might have extra qualifications in more holistic approaches?
Appreciate your help!

Its actually not funny at all.
There is a very good reason for it.
Someone who has trained in conventional medicine should know that "holistic/herbal" medicine is largely bunkum, with no evidence (which isn't nonsense) to support its alleged effectiveness.

And please don't take that as dismissive, closed minded or arrogant.

SanoVitae wrote: »

Why are you looking for a GP if you want to be recommended herbal remedies rather than antibiotics?

Rather similar to asking a vegetarian for a recipe for a nice beef meal because you're not into vegetables at all......

It's really not.
That is one of the worst similes I have ever seen.

this is quite shocking to see how "dismissive, closed minded or arrogant" you are in fact!
but you know what, be like that, your loss. we are looking for help here, not your judgement.
Maireann, there is a good gp and homeopath on ely place, d2. the first visit is expensive 110 as he makes a full assessment (around 1H) unlike the regular GP - "get your sick note, antibiotics- or drink a lot of fluids it's a virus" 10 min visit that costs 55-60 euro and you may have to come back for more!!
You may want to ring to know how he works. The only drawback is that he is hard to catch! best of luck

d'Oracle wrote: »

Its actually not funny at all.
There is a very good reason for it.
Someone who has trained in conventional medicine should know that "holistic/herbal" medicine is largely bunkum, with no evidence (which isn't nonsense) to support its alleged effectiveness.

And please don't take that as dismissive, closed minded or arrogant.

I disagree - too many GPs dole out antobiotics for fun with no thought or consideration.
How often have you gone to the GP paid your 50e and get a 5 min poke and off you go with a prescription.

How the hell can a GP really know what you need in 5 mins. They don't - cos it's like this "a general anti and he'll be fine and if it's more serious he'll be back in 3 days".
You are better off taking a natural remedy (or doing nothing) than most antibiotics .

As for me - I've not taken a painkiller or an antibiotic (bar 2 chest infections) in 10years and I'm better for it

King of Kings wrote: »

I disagree - too many GPs dole out antobiotics for fun with no thought or consideration.
How often have you gone to the GP paid your 50e and get a 5 min poke and off you go with a prescription.

With respect you aren't disagreeing with my point.
Your argument is fallacious.

Just because some GP's (and I stress some, you can't possibly know how many over prescribe antibiotics, you probably hear and read about it, but the media have an awful track record regarding misinforming on matters of health) usually under pressure, over prescribe antibiotics doesn't mean they are fundamentally wrong.

King of Kings wrote: »

How the hell can a GP really know what you need in 5 mins. They don't - cos it's like this "a general anti and he'll be fine and if it's more serious he'll be back in 3 days".
You are better off taking a natural remedy (or doing nothing) than most antibiotics .

Doctors can judge you quickly because of the years of diagnostic training they go through. The same as any other profession. If you walked into a gym to see a trainer with (for example) a hip problem and he was able to tell in 5 min you that you have a problem with your glute and gave you exercises which fixed you right up, you would be singing his praises.

Doctors do that kind of stuff any day.
You are painting an entire profession of highly trained individuals with one brush and writing them off probably based on "he said she said" nonsense.. Basically you are wrong to do this and the sentiment behind your entire post is wrong.

This is almost tinfoil hat stuff when you get down to it. Perpetuated by fecking bloodhungry 24hr news media culture.

And here is another thing,

If you would be better off doing nothing then by default you would not be better taking a herbal remedy. You would be the same, because they have been proven, relatively comprehensively to be largely useless. What antibiotics would you be better off taking seeing as you said it?

King of Kings wrote: »

As for me - I've not taken a painkiller or an antibiotic (bar 2 chest infections) in 10years and I'm better for it

The last 3 GP's I have been to see, I have only been prescribed once and that wasn't anti-biotics. Which is pretty good. That's maybe 4 years without.

You not taking anti-biotics proves absolutely nothing and you have no actual proof that you are better off. If you didn't need them, you didn't need them. I'm assuming that by "bar 2 chest infections" you mean that you took your antibiotics for those. If so what you are saying is that you took antibiotics twice when you needed them and didn't when you didn't.... This is how it works. In fact in trying to discredit the medical profession you have actually admitted that it works as it is supposed to.

Also Antibiotics are not some deadly toxin out to get us. The reason over-prescription is a problem is because of the genuine concern for the development of antibiotic resistance amongst bacteria.

d'Oracle wrote: »

With respect you aren't disagreeing with my point.
Your argument is fallacious.

ok. Thanks. I will try and keep my response as polite and reasoned as yours .

d'Oracle wrote: »

Just because some GP's (and I stress some, you can't possibly know how many over prescribe antibiotics, you probably hear and read about it, but the media have an awful track record regarding misinforming on matters of health) usually under pressure, over prescribe antibiotics doesn't mean they are fundamentally wrong.


Doctors can judge you quickly because of the years of diagnostic training they go through. The same as any other profession. If you walked into a gym to see a trainer with (for example) a hip problem and he was able to tell in 5 min you that you have a problem with your glute and gave you exercises which fixed you right up, you would be singing his praises.

Doctors do that kind of stuff any day.
You are painting an entire profession of highly trained individuals with one brush and writing them off probably based on "he said she said" nonsense.. Basically you are wrong to do this and the sentiment behind your entire post is wrong.

This is almost tinfoil hat stuff when you get down to it. Perpetuated by fecking bloodhungry 24hr news media culture.

I like your argument and I'd believe it too if I wasn't the subject of the argument.

you mightn't be aware of where I'm coming from - I tend not to treat these internet debates with the same gravitas as a Trinners Debating Final and I may have tried to squash in many ideas into a few lines.

On a minor point I distrust the media and journalists in general for reasons beyond the scope of this thread. So your argument doesn't apply to me. I thought it odd you'd go down that route.

All my arguments came from my personal experience with doctors. I'm 34 with 2 kids so i have some exposure to medicine in Ireland (I've never lived outside ireland - went to hospital in prague once 15 years ago that being my only non irish medical experience )

I could regale plenty of personal stories and bore the pants off you but I won't.
I will tell you that although i'm not a doctor I come from a large family of whom approx 50% are in the medicial game and I'll give you an example from the horses mouth.
My uncle is a consultant in a general field - and deals with infirm patients in a general nature.
He is forever horrified by other consultants (in specialised fields) putting his patients on medication that will heal their specific aliment (the one he/she cares about) but will ultimately kill them.

Example:
Uncle: You're on X for your liver
Patient : yeah
Uncle: Consultant 2 why have you patient on X for liver
Consultant 2: It's the best ****ing liver drug in the world BOOYAH!!!
Uncle : You know X contains B which will **** their heart and them having a weak heart won't be good and will ultimatley kill them
Consulatant 2: Well once it's not their liver then BOOYAH for me..

Clearly my scene from fair city is kinda in jest but that's what goes on.

I have my own experiences too - i won't claim they're as grave as what i described above.
So doctors might see it everyday but ultimately some are ****.
Some are good mind.
Not refresher exams for doctors in this state. Once you qualify you qualify for life.
They are closed minded as in they never look beyond the ****ing MIMS (that book they consult to find out what anti you should take).
My brother had a problem in his gut and once the GP heard he took protein and creatine...case closed.. "that **** will kill you".

d'Oracle wrote: »

If you would be better off doing nothing then by default you would not be better taking a herbal remedy. You would be the same, because they have been proven, relatively comprehensively to be largely useless. What antibiotics would you be better off taking seeing as you said it?

ok - i see what you did. Again It's my fault I tried to articulate in a few lines and I was abrupt.
Having a flu for example Manflu....I'd just drink lemon, boiling water with honey. In my experience I'll have manflu the same length of time doing that than whatever my GPs gives me and that is the basis of my argument.

I'd a pain in my knees once - they offered me meds however a girl I did Jujustu with told me to try evening primrose oil - i did and the pain went.
Now the meds could have worked but I'm happy using the Evening Primrose oil instead.

d'Oracle wrote: »

The last 3 GP's I have been to see, I have only been prescribed once and that wasn't anti-biotics. Which is pretty good. That's maybe 4 years without.

That is good but I never said all doctor were ****e. That would be as stupid as saying all priests are peados.

d'Oracle wrote: »

You not taking anti-biotics proves absolutely nothing and you have no actual proof that you are better off. If you didn't need them, you didn't need them.

correct in some way - but given I'm 34 I remember a time when I took eveyrthing the doc gave me - I find now I don't recover any slower than previously. i'll admit perhaps I haven't had the same precise illnesses but I meant in general.

d'Oracle wrote: »

I'm assuming that by "bar 2 chest infections" you mean that you took your antibiotics for those. If so what you are saying is that you took antibiotics twice when you needed them and didn't when you didn't.... This is how it works. In fact in trying to discredit the medical profession you have actually admitted that it works as it is supposed to.

yes. i'm not anti medicine. I'm anti the way they're used. I had a bad chest as a child till my teens - i recognise that a bad chest is my achilles heel. Once I get the cough and the phelm I go ape and it';s panic stations.

d'Oracle wrote: »

Also Antibiotics are not some deadly toxin out to get us.

well now you mention it.... I saw this program on TV once called the X files

d'Oracle wrote: »

The reason over-prescription is a problem is because of the genuine concern for the development of antibiotic resistance amongst bacteria.

I agree with that concern but I also believe a lot of people don't need what they are being given.

Look the crux of it all before we got into this was - I'd rather take a natural food/planet/bark of a tree if it'll work rather than a prescribed medicine.
But i'm not anti medicine just the applicaton of it sometimes

I guess i launched into this defending the OP and I hadn't planned on a ranting session.

By the way i only believe people use too many pain killers but let leave that for another day.

BTW - you caused me to write the longest post I ever wrote

King of Kings wrote: »

ok. Thanks. I will try and keep my response as polite and reasoned as yours .



I like your argument and I'd believe it too if I wasn't the subject of the argument.

you mightn't be aware of where I'm coming from - I tend not to treat these internet debates with the same gravitas as a Trinners Debating Final and I may have tried to squash in many ideas into a few lines.

On a minor point I distrust the media and journalists in general for reasons beyond the scope of this thread. So your argument doesn't apply to me. I thought it odd you'd go down that route.

All my arguments came from my personal experience with doctors. I'm 34 with 2 kids so i have some exposure to medicine in Ireland (I've never lived outside ireland - went to hospital in prague once 15 years ago that being my only non irish medical experience )

I could regale plenty of personal stories and bore the pants off you but I won't.
I will tell you that although i'm not a doctor I come from a large family of whom approx 50% are in the medicial game and I'll give you an example from the horses mouth.
My uncle is a consultant in a general field - and deals with infirm patients in a general nature.
He is forever horrified by other consultants (in specialised fields) putting his patients on medication that will heal their specific aliment (the one he/she cares about) but will ultimately kill them.

Example:
Uncle: You're on X for your liver
Patient : yeah
Uncle: Consultant 2 why have you patient on X for liver
Consultant 2: It's the best ****ing liver drug in the world BOOYAH!!!
Uncle : You know X contains B which will **** their heart and them having a weak heart won't be good and will ultimatley kill them
Consulatant 2: Well once it's not their liver then BOOYAH for me..

Clearly my scene from fair city is kinda in jest but that's what goes on.

I have my own experiences too - i won't claim they're as grave as what i described above.
So doctors might see it everyday but ultimately some are ****.
Some are good mind.
Not refresher exams for doctors in this state. Once you qualify you qualify for life.
They are closed minded as in they never look beyond the ****ing MIMS (that book they consult to find out what anti you should take).
My brother had a problem in his gut and once the GP heard he took protein and creatine...case closed.. "that **** will kill you".




ok - i see what you did. Again It's my fault I tried to articulate in a few lines and I was abrupt.
Having a flu for example Manflu....I'd just drink lemon, boiling water with honey. In my experience I'll have manflu the same length of time doing that than whatever my GPs gives me and that is the basis of my argument.

I'd a pain in my knees once - they offered me meds however a girl I did Jujustu with told me to try evening primrose oil - i did and the pain went.
Now the meds could have worked but I'm happy using the Evening Primrose oil instead.



That is good but I never said all doctor were ****e. That would be as stupid as saying all priests are peados.



correct in some way - but given I'm 34 I remember a time when I took eveyrthing the doc gave me - I find now I don't recover any slower than previously. i'll admit perhaps I haven't had the same precise illnesses but I meant in general.



yes. i'm not anti medicine. I'm anti the way they're used. I had a bad chest as a child till my teens - i recognise that a bad chest is my achilles heel. Once I get the cough and the phelm I go ape and it';s panic stations.


well now you mention it.... I saw this program on TV once called the X files




I agree with that concern but I also believe a lot of people don't need what they are being given.

Look the crux of it all before we got into this was - I'd rather take a natural food/planet/bark of a tree if it'll work rather than a prescribed medicine.
But i'm not anti medicine just the applicaton of it sometimes

I guess i launched into this defending the OP and I hadn't planned on a ranting session.

By the way i only believe people use too many pain killers but let leave that for another day.

BTW - you caused me to write the longest post I ever wrote

There is a lot there. Way too much for a multiquote.:D

I get your points though.
And its a shame.
Like I can't say much against your experience, I understand you problem.
I just don't think that herbal remedies with no real weight of evidence is better.

But did your uncle tell you to put your faith in herbal remedies?

See the thing is most of these herbal remedies (I say most) are bunkum.
They are seen to work because no intervention would have worked anyway.
You would have gotten better anyway.
Like the knee thing.
Do you know what caused the knee pain?
Do you know why Evening Primrose oil worked? How it worked?
Would it have gotten better anyway?
Cos if not, you don't know that it did work. You don't have correlation or causation. Literally all you have is coincidence.

See the important thing here is that if a Doctor turns around and decides that he/she wants to prescribe herbal remedies, then one of two things have happened.

1) The doctor has not assessed the weight of evidence behind the remedy or
2) The doctor is lying in the hope of taking advantage of the placebo effect.

These are literally the only two ways to go on it, 1) is incompetence
and 2) is unethical.

I get the feeling we agree on most of this, but that we have just weighted our scepticism in opposite directions.