GPs threaten to remove patients who visit ‘Dr Google’ first

[amasufindme]

So ... another thought provoking article:

inews.co.uk/essentials/news...

[Haze1975]

The only problem using the net to find out what’s wrong with you. It could come up with 3/10 answer and if you read the worst one. And it might be something small. Who ever knows. The Gp and specialist always will the power. Because of we all still need them to help us. The only problem is now days, everyone I likes to understand what’s going wrong. And what they can do to feel better. But I don’t think they should be shutting at people because of it. Or taking them of there list thous. Let’s see what’s happens.

[bantam12 in reply to Haze1975]

Haze1975 in many cases the GP and specialist are about as good as a chocolate teapot rather than being "the power"

If I hadn't diagnosed myself with parathyroid disease I could quite possibly have died from hypercalcemia crisis, neither GP or Consultant had a clue, only through my persistence did I get to see a surgeon who did know what he was doing.

If GP's don't like patients googling then we just don't tell them 🤗

[helvella Administrator]

The article does go on to include a positive story, and ends with:

“As GPs we need to be frank with our patients about the limitations of Dr Google, but I certainly would never consider removing patients who take a proactive interest in their health from my practice list.”

As I see it, the medical establishment and healthcare system has brought a lot of this on itself. The following thoughts fleet through my mind:

🔵 If someone is diagnosed with a thyroid disorder, the GP simply does not have time to explain even the basics (time of dosing, avoiding eating/drinking/supplements/other medicines near the same time, return for test, etc.) There should be an information prescription. I'd like to see them give out a decent booklet, print a business card with specific links on it (including QR codes!), offer an at-cost posting of a print-on-demand book, or whatever is both appropriate and possible.

🔵 Whatever is said in the session with the GP can be forgotten in seconds. Some sort of summary of session should be offered.

🔵 Sometimes the internet provides reassurance that something isn't serious. These internet interactions are likely to be missed by GPs - unless they patient brings it up.

🔵 GPs themselves need to remember how out-of-date much of their training is, how little they know about each disorder they come across.

At the same time, we, as patients, can probably help by ensuring that whatever we take is short, easy to read, and pertinent. And spending MORE time reading up!

[helvella Administrator in reply to helvella]

A little reflection has made me realise that the GPs who cannot accept searching patients could end up with extremely quiet clinics.

After all, the NHS itself seems to expect us to look things up! Even if on their website.

[bantam12 in reply to helvella]

One GP actually told me that she thought in the future GPs would be obsolete as we would all be able to diagnose ourselves by looking things up, she was pro Dr Google 👍

[humanbean in reply to helvella]

theguardian.com/society/201...

The above (recent) article suggests that GPs may be obsolete because AI will do the job instead.

Let's face it, doctors have been dead keen on Evidence Based Medicine, regardless of how bad the research is that so much EBM is based on. And I'm aware that GPs use flowcharts as aids to diagnosis. You don't need doctors to follow flowcharts, patients and computers can do that.

It only needs Pharma companies to be in control of and design the flowcharts and we'll all be on statins, hypertension drugs, psychiatry drugs for psychosis, depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, drugs to deal with diabetes. One thing we won't have is access to T3 and NDT or any diagnosis of nutrient deficiencies. And T4 will probably be severely rationed.

bantam12

[amasufindme in reply to humanbean]

Frightening thought humanbean - I must start building my spaceship and get off this planet!

[helvella Administrator in reply to humanbean]

Not just bad research, utter lack of research.

It was only a few hours ago that diogenes posted about stomach acidity and levothyroxine absorption. We might have hoped this had been done scores of years ago...

AI will, I believe, inevitably still need doctors - if for nothing else than to ensure the patients are not lying.

The big issue is always going to be the difficulty of making changes. Imagine one simple facet like when we take our levothyroxine. Around ten years ago a paper came out saying bed-time was acceptable and could even have advantages. A trickle of papers has followed. Yet the documentation with many levothyroxine products still says "before breakfast".

Any AI model would only pick this up if patients actually insisted they took it at bed-time - and the results were good. Most of us would likely just not bother informing the AI system. So it could be missed for decades... or longer.

At the moment we don't even have a comprehensive list of medicines that affect thyroid/interact with thyroid medicines.

[Had-enough]

If I didn't use Dr Google I wouldn't have come across this site, which had literally saved my health. It's all very well doctors saying don't use it, but when you get the 'you're in range now bugger off' attitude from them, what are you supposed to do?

[Hidden in reply to Had-enough]

hear! hear!... mine had the same attitude.

[Greybeard]

The genie isnt going back in the bottle.

Particularly in the case of gps their knowldge base is wide but not very deep with us patients our knowledge is often narrow but very detailed. When dealing with medics I dont use the words google or internet and they in turn dont start spitting blood.

[amasufindme in reply to Greybeard]

Too true Greybeard63

GPs are signposting script writers... knowing a little bit about a lot of things...

I keep schtum nowadays about using the "Tinternet "

I remember causing my GP to malfunction once when she asked "where are getting this information from?" and I then reeled off a list of doctors and research papers. She then wrote a very negative referral letter to a gastroenterologist stating twice that I researched extensively and I asked for a battery of tests/was often frustrated with the NHS/tended to prefer alternative treatment other than those following NHS guidelines. I told her this character analysis was irrelevant and antagonistic and asked her to rewrite it - she eventually did!

[ITYFIALMCTT]

The epatient movement is so strong in the US and other countries that they must be baffled that this is even being raised as an issue in the UK.

For people who might not be familiar with epatients - the best-known is Dave de Bronkhart

epatientdave.com

And, yes, I think it's annoying and quite telling that the BMJ's Patient Perspective experts are from the US (or, they were the last time that I looked). Having said that, this a superb piece about how difficult it is for expert patients in the UK to obtain the cooperation that they need from HCPs even when we're being encouraged to self-manage our own chronic conditions: betabetic.wordpress.com/201...

[amasufindme]

Without the internet and especially you lovely people on this forum I would still be in my health crisis. I am doing amazingly well now that I am on a AIP diet and addressing my gut dysbiosis/damage - no help from my GP!

The title of the article certainly grabs our attention ... I want to tut and eye roll once again, but - do you know - nowadays I just can't be arsed.

It is heartening, as Helvella indicated, that in the article some doctors are realizing the potent synergy of collaborating with the informed patient and it is their duty of care to work WITH the patient.

[scottlayton35]

If gps were any good we wouldnt have to google anything.