12-01-2022, 09:30 AM
A Level 7 (naturopathy) diploma is approximate to a bachelor's degree so is worthy of respect. Added to an existing medical degree it would be great. Standing alone, the three years aren't really comparable to the 6 years university education needed to start two years experience on the job as a junior doctor. After that they spend about 6 years gaining specialist skills and qualifications (a total of 14 years!), one of which can be choosing to become a GP. Other specialists learn a greater degree of depth in their chosen field.The GP has to be a generalist - able to recognise and deal with anything that comes their way. I have worked in the health sector and have seen first hand the hours of work, the mind-blowing depth of knowledge needed to pass the exams, and the overall pressure experienced by the young doctors. A Level 7 diploma is not comparable.
Dietetics is a separate allied health discipline, like physiotherapy, etc. I think that's where naturopathy would fit in if it was accepted, although dieticians do a degree plus a post-grad masters.
There always seems to be excessive mistrust of GPs' abilities. Obviously they are human and make mistakes, but are working much more "alone" than other specialists. Sure, they have colleagues around them, but they don't have the "group" concept that other specialists do. Even a specialist who is the only one in a region still has students under them to question and discuss what they see.
A young GP may not yet have gained the breadth of experience needed, and an older one is likely struggling to keep up with the business side of practice, not to mention the vast amount of reading just to keep up with the speed of today's increase in knowledge. Add to that the fact that a day at work is likely to be endless people coming through with the "same ole ..." so it is easy to miss the one in a thousand patient when the symptoms show something more than expected.
Just as any profession has good people and not so good people, with doctors you also have the medical knowledge v. patient communication v. the time pressure of the appointment system. So the best doctor in the world could be a poor communicator and I think this is why a lot of people feel they get more from alternative treatment providers, simply because they feel cared about and listened to. When the GP pauses to talk properly to the patient, they are instantly late for the next patient and by the end of the day patients who have waited over an hour past their appointment time are understandably getting grumpy. The doctor is then finishing their day very late, and may still have a couple of hours of paperwork to do. The appointment times are set by the practice management who needs to run it as a business. How many people are willing to book and pay for two appointments to give themselves a bit of extra time with the doctor? I do that sometimes.
Many complementary therapies have a place. Some have good evidence for efficacy and some are just placebo, with homeopathy probably the most well known. The practitioners still do courses to learn how to apply the principles, but I'm sure they are not told that there is little to no basis for the supposed benefit. There's a good readable article at https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010/192/...ce-tell-us.
Dietetics is a separate allied health discipline, like physiotherapy, etc. I think that's where naturopathy would fit in if it was accepted, although dieticians do a degree plus a post-grad masters.
There always seems to be excessive mistrust of GPs' abilities. Obviously they are human and make mistakes, but are working much more "alone" than other specialists. Sure, they have colleagues around them, but they don't have the "group" concept that other specialists do. Even a specialist who is the only one in a region still has students under them to question and discuss what they see.
A young GP may not yet have gained the breadth of experience needed, and an older one is likely struggling to keep up with the business side of practice, not to mention the vast amount of reading just to keep up with the speed of today's increase in knowledge. Add to that the fact that a day at work is likely to be endless people coming through with the "same ole ..." so it is easy to miss the one in a thousand patient when the symptoms show something more than expected.
Just as any profession has good people and not so good people, with doctors you also have the medical knowledge v. patient communication v. the time pressure of the appointment system. So the best doctor in the world could be a poor communicator and I think this is why a lot of people feel they get more from alternative treatment providers, simply because they feel cared about and listened to. When the GP pauses to talk properly to the patient, they are instantly late for the next patient and by the end of the day patients who have waited over an hour past their appointment time are understandably getting grumpy. The doctor is then finishing their day very late, and may still have a couple of hours of paperwork to do. The appointment times are set by the practice management who needs to run it as a business. How many people are willing to book and pay for two appointments to give themselves a bit of extra time with the doctor? I do that sometimes.
Many complementary therapies have a place. Some have good evidence for efficacy and some are just placebo, with homeopathy probably the most well known. The practitioners still do courses to learn how to apply the principles, but I'm sure they are not told that there is little to no basis for the supposed benefit. There's a good readable article at https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010/192/...ce-tell-us.