Whatever will Dr Frank do if he falls ill & can't be fixed?!

Whatever will Dr Frank do if he falls ill & can't be fixed?

Dr Frank has slated alternative medicine on this site as being mumbo-jumbo, nothing but voodoo, etc. What might he do if he falls ill with something that cannot be helped by his conventional medicine? Will he just give up or might he pursue something that just MIGHT help him?

I have read some of "Dr Franks" sweeping comments about alternative therapies & been enraged. I too have been around the health care circuit for more years than I care to remember - Oh yes I do! It's 28 years in fact - so enough to make a fair & valuable comment about "both sides of the fence".
I spent many years in a senior position in the NHS & saw suffering beyond belief from drug therapies. My last week working in the Operating Theatre saw 3 deaths during surgery to try to save people who bled to death because of prescribed drugs!! Look at the state of things now with MRSA being rife because of random use of antibiotics!
When conventional medicine diagnosed me with an incurable illness, I turned to alternative / complementary therapies & haven't looked back since. What I have found as a patient is gentle treatments that really do relieve symptoms - and I was a bit of a sceptic because I too was entrenched in the science of all things conventional. Not in any way doubting that science is a wonderful & brilliant thing, it really doesn't have all the answers. Think back about 30 years when MS sufferers were labelled mallingers because science hadn't caught up with them - no one would deny their suffering now.
The trouble with the conventional standpoint on homoeopathy, which is now my chosen profession, is that traditional trials will NEVER prove that it works and that is purely because there are not remedies for diseases - there are remedies for people with diseases. A few years ago, during the biannual "bash a homoeopath week" one of the medical comics reported the results of a trial of homoeopathic Arnica, given to women who were undergoing hysterectomy - and guess what? There was nothing positive reported! Well - no small wonder there as there was nothing individual about the prescribing. Women have hysterectomies for many, many different reasons and their emotional responses would be very very different in each case - so different remedies are needed - for the INDIVIDUAL. Therefore, it is completely ridiculous to use traditional trial methods when "testing" homoeopathy.
If I had 20 patients come to me with arthritis pain, chances are, I'd prescribe 20 different remedies. In my experience, after the first remedy, 75% would return after a month with a improvement of symptoms. I'd expect the majority of the others to respond after further prescriptions.
The placebo card is usually played by the conventionalists at this point but when you see gross pathology - even cancer - improve, or animals & babies relieved of pain & other symptoms, this arguement does not stand up.
No one will argue that love and faith exist. However, we can't see them, touch them, measure them in any way but those of us who have experience of them, know that they are very real. So because there is not a scientific report into how to measure these things, are they denied? No, I think not.
As a Homoeopath, I dread the day that science uncovers exactly how homoeopathy works as that day will see the ruin of this gentle therapeutic practice as scientists try to "make it fit" the conventional disease models.
I understand that some GPs are not like Dr Frank and do have an understanding of alternative therapies and do not deny them or decry them to the same pit as voodoo. I also know the course content that Doctors undertake when they "train" in homoeopathy - and it's no small wonder that some make a hash of trying to prescribe them as they are applying the disease model and not the individual-ness of the practice. Obviously they have time constraints. I spend 2 hours with every new patient to try to see what makes them tick - there isn't the time in General Practice for this. But in the meantime, I do wish individuals such as Dr Frank would open their mind. I really Do wonder where he would turn if he had no other option and his own type of medicine couldn't help?
I justified to myself the work I did in the past by choosing to work in Trauma & Emergency - if someone has had a bad road traffic accident - what they really need is a hospital and all that can be thrown at them - but that's not to say that a few COMPLEMENTARY therapies cannot be used alongside. Conventional medicine does not hold a monopoly on health and to suggest it does is not in the patients best interest.
To finish, I hold 2 First Class Honours Degrees so do consider myself of fair intelligence. I have practiced both types of health care so know I speak from a position of knowledge. I don't just wipe the floor with things I have an extremely limited knowledge & experience of.