If this means with aviation experience they are going to be few and far between.
Yes. It's a daft compromise, designed to satisfy the letter of the Basic Regulation while protecting the interests of the European AME community.
[Art 7]
A person shall only be issued a medical certificate when he or
she complies with the rules established to ensure compliance
with the essential requirements on medical fitness as set out in
Annex III. This medical certificate may be issued by aero-medical
examiners or by aero-medical centres.
Notwithstanding the [paragraph above], in the case of a leisure
pilot licence [LAPL] a general medical practitioner who has sufficient
detailed knowledge of the applicant's medical background may, if
so permitted under national law, act as an aero-medical
examiner, in accordance with detailed implementing rules
adopted pursuant to the procedure referred to in Article 65(3);
these implementing rules shall ensure that the level of safety is
maintained.
...
[Essential Requirements] 4.a.1. All pilots must periodically demonstrate medical fitness to satisfactorily execute their functions, taking into account the type of activity. Compliance must be shown by appropriate assessment based on aero-medical best practice, taking into account the type of activity and the possible mental and physical degradation due to age.
When this was drafted, I think the model in mind was the UK NPPL and the GP medical declaration, which most GPs were happy to certify as consistent with known patient history.
But when the implementing rules were developed, a requirement for an
examination, not just a
declaration, was introduced. Thus although the LAPL Medical is easier to get than the Class 2, it's still an exam and no doctor with any sense is going to sign off on such an exam without a substantial fee. So the cost advantage is lost. I think it's unlikely that a GP would want to do LAPL medicals but not bother to become an AME.