With regards to the on-going debate of which degree can best serve the interest of future US osteopaths, I invite you to vote with a simple "yes" or "no" without further explanation to clutter the board. Also, to keep this poll honest and representative of the opinions held by the osteopathic community, I ask that only DO students or DO physicians cast their votes.
Question 1: Will you want DO schools to issue the MD degree to their graduates?
Question 2: Will you want DO schools to issue the MD/DO degree to their graduates?
Question 3: Do you think that further media campaign will do any good to improve DO's visibility in the future?

Allow me to cast my first votes.

1. No
2. Yes
3. No

1. NO (Because we're not)

2. NO (Because it's not noticed)

3. YES (We've seen many things take off thanks to great marketing)

Rob
AZCOM 2004

1. No.

2. No--But I would open up GME for MD's who wanted to learn OMM and let them get board certified by the AOA. The MD's will certify us, but we won't certify them. That's not fair...

3. Yes--but only marginally. I think quality research and quality graduates will do more for our profession than will billboards and slogans.

Sorry, couldn't resist further clarification!

--dave

1. No, not instead of the DO
2. Yes, I wish they issued both degrees for easier international acceptance
3. No, not unless they hire Michael Jordan (for $$$) to do a piece

No, yes, no.

Interestingly, the only DO school to 'jump ship' from AOA to LCME, is once again receiving media attention with another scandal.

Here we are at the end of 1999 and the most famous DO continues to be Sam Shepherd (sp?), of "The Fugitive" fame.

IMO, the unity campaign should be aimed at developing a dual DO/MD program. The CA podiatry school has developed a five year DPM/MD for the recently entered class. Of course, I do not see a DO/MD program being developed within the confines of the AOA. They continue to struggle to develop enough intern spots to match the # of graduates ea year. Raising the AOA schools to LCME standards is not within their (current) capabilities.

See cliff's post below.

[This message has been edited by Karl (edited 11-29-1999).]

1. NO
2. YES
3. YES

1. NO
2. NO
3. YES, but only in a movie or television type setting where the main character is a DO.

[This message has been edited by Michael (edited 11-14-1999).]

1) yes
2) yes
3) yes

1. No
2. Yes (likewise, an MD who's had the training should also qualify for the MD/DO or DO/MD thang)
3. Yes

No, yes, no -- We are Doctors of Medicine, and we are also Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine.

No.
Yes. I like the idea of an OMD
Yes. There is an awakening interest to allopathic alternatives.

I've just recently learned that OMD is already taken. OMD = Oriental Medical Doctor
I don't think I like it anyway! Sorry Rich.

[This message has been edited by Karl (edited 11-29-1999).]

Re: 3?s

no
no
no......no, no,no

This whining is stupid. It was acceptible before starting school and being clueless but it is not anymore. It makes you look unconfident about your carreer choice and selves. If you want an MD, go get one. If you aren't going to get the social recognition and do not want to continually be asked what you are - don't do it- walk away. Go to med school outside the US if you need to and then come back. You are going to be taught the same material. Love it or leave it.

It pains me to witness this conversation. If you think the grass may be greener on the other side walk over. No is forcing you to become a doctor , hopefully. This med school thing takes way too much time and energy not to love it. Go and find out foryoursleves just how much greener the grass is, and grow up. Helping people is helping people. A long thoracic nerve innervates the serr. ant. m according to both MDs and DOs.

No more of this please--- just look at our history - CA in the 60's.

[This message has been edited by cliff (edited 11-25-1999).]

1.no
2.? I think something has to be done about the initials, it's insane that there is no 'M' for medicine considering that's what we do, we practice medicine, and go to MEDICAL school, there should always be a difference in the initials to account for our extra training, however.
3.yes

1.no
2.no
3.yesssssss!

------------------
siul

1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes

No

No

Yes

(1) No
(2) Yes
(3) Yes

1. No
2. NO
3. Yes

No
Yes
No

No
Yes - echo mmaher
Yes - echo the part about if it is on television or movie etc.

1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes

I personally don't like the idea of DO/MD but for our people in the US (it's the quickest and financially cost-effective way to let our general public who we are!) and for those of you who are interested in international medicine, I think it's time to do so.

no...yes...yes

no!...yes...maybe

no
yes
yes

Interesting.

1. Yes, until we solve the problem that almost 70% of graduating D.O.s have to go to M.D. residencies (D.O. residencies could anly accomodate 30% of the graduates annually)and trained allopathically and thus would most likely to practice no different than M.D.
2. Yes, same reason as above
3. Yes, can't hurt to get your name out and make it a familiar to the public

1. No
2. No
3. Yes

Why are people so hung up on initials???? :confused:

I'm hung up on initials because I crave respect from the lay person. There's nothing like the thrill of superiority that one feels when a commoner looks up in awe at the initials behind my name (nevermind that most have no idea what those initials mean).

Just kidding. In the end, if you don't have the skills, the initials aren't going to help you.

1. no- DOs are not MDs
2. yes- especially for those DOs that do MD residencies
3. yes- to an extent it will be helpful, although i don't want to see a campaign that is derogatory or divisive with our MD brethren

Wow, I never thought that there were so many people on the fence.

1. Definitely NO

2. NO (unless you are a foreign trained MD wishing to become a DO)

3. Most certainly YES!!

Originally posted by San_Juan_Sun
I'm hung up on initials because I crave respect from the lay person. There's nothing like the thrill of superiority that one feels when a commoner looks up in awe at the initials behind my name (nevermind that most have no idea what those initials mean).



:laugh: :laugh:

1. No

2. Yes

3. Yes

:clap:

For those who say yes to question #2 why?????

agree 100%
Originally posted by cliff
Re: 3?s

no
no
no......no, no,no

This whining is stupid. It was acceptible before starting school and being clueless but it is not anymore. It makes you look unconfident about your carreer choice and selves. If you want an MD, go get one. If you aren't going to get the social recognition and do not want to continually be asked what you are - don't do it- walk away. Go to med school outside the US if you need to and then come back. You are going to be taught the same material. Love it or leave it.

It pains me to witness this conversation. If you think the grass may be greener on the other side walk over. No is forcing you to become a doctor , hopefully. This med school thing takes way too much time and energy not to love it. Go and find out foryoursleves just how much greener the grass is, and grow up. Helping people is helping people. A long thoracic nerve innervates the serr. ant. m according to both MDs and DOs.

No more of this please--- just look at our history - CA in the 60's.

[This message has been edited by cliff (edited 11-25-1999).]

The grass may look greener on the other side, but it's still just grass.

1.) No (the DO letters imply a specific approach to practicing medicine that is not necessarily implied in the MD letters)
2.) No (we go to DO school to be DO's. And rarely do patients not know that DO's are a kind of medical doctor; after all, DO's prescribe medicines, do surgeries and walk around wearing white coats and stethoscopes, all the while calling themselves "Doctor". In the end, degree initials become invisible, so what would the MD title be doing for DO's?)
3.) No (So far the majority of people have no idea what DO's are despite advertising campaigns--but hey, I'd more than gladly like to be wroing on this one)