Ignoring NHS advice is often advisable

[raranah]

They just always seem to be way out of date.

I ignored the advice its safe to have x amount of units a week and I had nothing.

I ignored the advice to avoid nuts while expecting and for the first year. Reports say this could increase risks of allergies.

Both of these the advice has / is changing and I feel very vindicated.

They are still pushing low fat stuff, loaded with sugar and artificial sweeteners. I'm sure this advice will be outdated in a few years.

[MackerelOfFact]

'The NHS' is not one homogenous mass, and it doesn't really set recommendations anyway - NICE and similar organisations set the standards, and Universities and other non-NHS learning institutions provide the education and CPD, for the most part.

When it comes to health promotion advice (like the type you describe, as opposed to 'take these tablets or you'll die' which would be fucking stupid to ignore) there's an element of common sense involved anyway. Unfortunately, healthcare professionals often have to assume you have no common sense.

[VestalVirgin]

They are still pushing low fat stuff, loaded with sugar and artificial sweeteners. I'm sure this advice will be outdated in a few years.

This is already outdated for every thinking person out there.

Or you mean it will be outdated as advice given by the NHS?

[PhilPhilConnors]

But NHS advice isn't always based on evidence based research, it's often based on skewed information which is allowed to run and run, even when evidence comes to light that the information is wrong.
The Great Cholesterol Con goes into this in great detail. Some gps are agreeing with this, others are still pushing statins left right and centre. There is too much conflicting advice from the very people who trust and rely on to give us correct information.

[Micah]

They are still pushing low fat stuff, loaded with sugar and artificial sweeteners. I'm sure this advice will be outdated in a few years

Are they?

www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Goodfood/Pages/Goodfoodhome.aspx

I've only had a quick glance, but it all seems reasonable to me. First picture is reducing refined sugar. Balanced diet, reduce processed food, increase fibre/unprocessed stuff.

Maybe you should keep up to date with NHS advice ;)

[Higge]

But NHS advice isn't always based on evidence based research, it's often based on skewed information which is allowed to run and run, even when evidence comes to light that the information is wrong.

[VestalVirgin]

When it comes to prevention, I do all my medical research myself, looking for actual scientific studies rather than magazine articles.

GPs just don't have the time to stay up to date with everything, and some specialists might also be a bit too lazy and/or arrogant to keep themselves updated.

[CantSee4Looking]

I have got to the point where I print out research and take it to my appointments as I have a condition that most GPs know fuck all about if they agree it exists. It does not make me popular, but it is harder for them to argue with medical research papers than joe blogg patient. And this is about the medicine side of things not dietary.

[CantSee4Looking]

I do agree with "GPs just don't have the time to stay up to date with everything" but it is also frustrating when you just want to be given appropriate meds not ones that will cause a problem

[Higge]

I go to my GP and advise them on what I need for my condition - often they have to google it while I'm there! The dermatologist wanted to prescribe me anti-biotics when I told her that research shows they don't work very effectively and mostly only short term, she agreed and shrugged her shoulders - she said most people just want something - anything!

[jorahmormont]

I agree with CantSee, I've now taken to printing out research too. The same doctor told me there was no way I have Ehlers Danlos (despite being told by several doctors that I do) as I don't have the Marfanoid stature. If I'd taken the NHS diagnostic criteria with me I could've shown him that Marfanoid stature is one of the minor criteria - and the only criteria of them all, major and minor, that I don't have.

It's disheartening for patients to be told one thing by one doctor and another by another, especially when they're supposedly specialists. It's understandable that they don't have time to stay up to date with everything, but you'd think they'd at least be familiar with conditions like EDS.

[LaContessaDiPlump]

Honest to God, I can see the job of a GP as something that is eminently suited to be taken over by an android. Far superior access to knowledge and ability to recall same, and people won't take the rapid speech and miniscule visit time personally because it's an android doing it. It will also reduce the capacity for human error.

Sorry, doctors :(

[BeyondThirty]

Have you got an eds diagnosis now jorah?
My rheum also told me it was not eds, so i went round her, got genetics appt from my gp and (a long wait later) the geneticist diagnosed me

[PresidentUnderwood]

I've had a number of serious health conditions and my GP's have been honest when they have limited knowledge. The hospital consultants I've worked with are exceptional - thinking about risk, working when me to try medicines or caring for myself.

I've always managed to have practical conversations with HCP from midwives, nurses, GP's and consultants - I respect their training, experience and profession. Not listening or thinking they can be replaced by a robot is sensationalist pub talk.

God forbid you ever find yourself really Ill and at deaths door, you'll soon bloody listen

[mummymeister]

Dear Mr Hunt,

please wind up the NHS. Sack all the doctors, midwives, nurses, physios etc. Instead use MN. It is the font of all knowledge and advice and is never ever wrong - except when it is and then there is always at least one post that isn't wrong so you have to pick and choose which posts are right based on - oh I don't know, a finger in the wind?
-----------------

Of course doctors get it wrong they are human beings not computers. and of course advice changes - just look at the advice in the 40's that smoking helped with asthma. I would much sooner trust the advice of a doctor about a health issue than the man in the papershop or the person on MN.

there will always be people on here who post how they found out what was wrong with them because of research on the internet when the professionals didn't know.

but who do you think writes all this stuff on the internet? that's right, generally people with medical training.

[jorahmormont]

None of us are saying all doctors are wrong, all of the time - but some doctors get it wrong a lot of the time, in ways that cause a lot of distress and physical pain for patients.

[BeyondThirty]

Can i just clarify? I'm not sure if people are rplying to me or to other posts.. (Btw i agree that a gp cannot possibly read every published paper as it is published and be completely up to date, im not talking about gps, nor am i talking about reading every paper.)

But does anyone here disagree that a consultant (as in mine and jorahs cases) should be up to date with the info that is on the nhs website re their specialism? Is that really asking too much of them? I'm honestly not being argumentative, i would like to know if i am expecting too much of people.

[mummymeister]

jorahmormont so these "some doctors" have you made a formal complaint about them to the GMC? if they are so appallingly bad at their jobs then I assume that you have.

BeyondThirty if someone, anyone isn't competent then complain. formally and in writing. of course people should be up to date if it is their specialism but no one can read everything and be the font of all knowledge can they?

[jorahmormont]

Well as I'm currently still trying to get treatment for the (actually totally unrelated) condition he also told me I didn't have despite being told again by several doctors - GPs, A&E doctors and another consultant - that I did, I'm a little wary to make a complaint about him just yet, but I fully intend to once it's over.

[araiba]

"but some doctors get it wrong a lot of the time"

citation needed

[LaContessaDiPlump]

araiba

www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/Health-systems/patient-safety/data-and-statistics

Bit old but they support the point. Would you rather believe that all doctors get it wrong 8-12% of the time, or that there is an error-prone minority which pulls the average up?

[SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius]

"Thanks Joe, obviously from my post I'm just talking about dietary advice"

Not obvious at all, raranrah.

Should diabetics ignore the dietary advice the NHS offers? What about people with coeliac disease?

[PhilPhilConnors]

Actually there's growing evidence that people with type 2 diabetes can be cured by following a low carb high fat diet, but Uk drs generally advise low carb and medication.

[PhilPhilConnors]

Low fat I mean, sorry!

[CantSee4Looking]

The currently levels of tollerable amount of gluten and wheat according to statistics still cause significant reactions in a number of patients. When I queried the inclusion of these sorts of things in medicines yes seriously read the ingrediants carefully and you will be surprised I was told by the doctor he didn't understand what the problem was as they were classed as safe drugs. Yep that is despite visible evidence of reaction.

[CantSee4Looking]

And it is the level of wheat/gluten that is tollerable that is quoted by statistics just to be clear.