DO; to remain separate or merge with MD?

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Originally Posted by COMedic2Doc

Personally, I'm for keeping the degrees separate.

I really hate when pre-meds start getting panicked over things like residency without even getting into school. I am a huge fan of concentrating on the next step, i.e. getting into medical school and then worrying about the step after that. Hospitals know that there is a huge physician shortage looming and imho they will address this with the AGME, AOA, and AMA. Just my .02.

thanks for the comment and for your service in Iraq.

You speak about Hospitals, the AGME the AOA and AMA as if you are not a part of them. I think we need to see the world as something we influence directly, not just react to.

Originally Posted by sylvanthus

When you actually start medical school you will soon realize the "philosophy" is largely BS and the additional training you receive is at expense of other things and is questionable at best. Yes, my school taught us some OMT, when actually researching it alot of it was essentially worthless. We also got really really poor micro training.

There is only so much time and adding something generally comes at the expense of something else. So, no I don't thing MD + more is what our training is, nor do I think we deserve an MD title + DO. I think that is insulting and misleading.

Again we are either different or the same, we are not a hybrid that is better and above and beyond.

More and more what I actually realize is that out experiences are a product of our own effort and desire. The experience you are having is not the same for anyone else, though there will be certain shared generalities. A school will have a philosophy, but whether you adopt it, modify it, or call it BS is up to each individual. As a DO you can adopt the general DO philosophies and personalize them to your own practice...no one is stoping you.

As for your education, Im sorry it was poor in certain areas, but we are talking big picture here, not single school. Look at TCOM, DMU, CCOM, KCUMB and many other outstanding DO programs that have rigorous academic training...these are virtually the same as many other MD programs and this trend will continue until entrance stats of some DO schools will be same or higher than some MD schools. Its inevitable.

So from your last paragraph, since you don't think DO is MD + more, it sounds like you think it MD - something. So, you would keep it different and believe that DO is at least slightly inferior training? I guess you can have that opinion, but I disagree. Im also not sure how MD/DO is misleading or who it insults, so feel free to elaborate if you'd like.

MD/DO is not the only issue nor the only solution. It seems pretty good to me, but I have enjoyed everyones responses and ideas so far.

Are we really Doctors of Osteopathy, or do we treat the whole person? Are we on the same level as DC, DNP, DPT, DPM? Do we want to be unambiguously recognized and be free to practice medicine across the world as our peers with MDs are and do?

I also like the idea of keeping the DO degree in theory, but as the training becomes increasingly similar to MDs(if it isn't already), isn't this the more misleading idea?

Nothing ever stays the same, everything changes. And those who are prepared for change and anticipate it are the one who will get to help create what that change will be.

So if my training is up to me why dont i just invent my own degree, the wtfomgbbq degree? I say again, start medical school and them talk to me about your quality of training and the DO philosophy.

Here's a piece of information to consider. One of the main reasons why we don't have an MD, DO degree (which, by the way, was the initial way the degree was configured...medical doctor with a diploma of osteopathy) is because political and other groups joined forces and denounced this action, in this case at TCOM.

This was taken from the formal letter from a former student president of TCOM(graduated over 30 years ago) and current leader in hispanic DOs. His sentiments are representative of many others:

"After surviving blatant allopathic ostracism based on my TCOM Osteopathic upbringing I am deeply chagrined at the thought of offering an MD degree at TCOM."

So, in plain terms, because he experienced ostracism from MDs 30 YEARS AGO, he is forever bitter against all MDs. Is this how we want to be different than MDs? Bitter?

This is fighting ignorance with more ignorance, is it not? I, for one, am disappointed in this.

I think we need a better reason than than spite...


*In the end, I want there to be an Osteopathic identity, but I want it to be for the right reasons.

Originally Posted by HalfListic

Hey MedPR, glad you joined the discussion.

I want to challenge this idea though. The BA/BS is a differentiation of studying art v science. There is a pretty significant difference here, but there is no additional work done by either bachelors student.

MD and DO degree is essentially taught on the same level in the same way in comparable MD/DO schools. The DO program just adds a little DO history and OMM training. In this light, DO is closer to MD/MPH (or one of the other various dual degree programs) is it not? Its a medical degree with added training and focus.

So, by my view of how things are taught, if you keep MD and DO separate, DO school must be fundamentally different than MD school in their basic training, which they are not (nor would I want them to be).

Since that wont happen, it seems logical that you either have to recognize the duality of the DO programs, being a basic medical education, with an addition of DO philosophy and practice and award a degree the same way you would someone who got a basic medical education plus the addition of public health (MD/MPH) or law (MD/JD) or business (MD/MBA).

You wouldn't award an MD/JD something like DL (doctor of Law?) So why Doctor of Osteopathy? We are medical Doctors, with Osteopathic training and philosophy.

Originally Posted by H Y F R

Soooo, there actually is a considerable difference between BA and BS. But the difference is not as pronounced between MD/DO, so this example isn't great.

Is this now the de facto MD vs DO thread?

I guess my undergrad (Saint Louis U) is unique then. The difference between a BA/BS in biology is 9 more humanities credits (BA) or 8 more science credits (BS). All the other coursework is the same and that's why I made the comparison. DO = MD+OMM as far as pre-clinicals go. I don't know much about M3/M4 rotations or residency programs except what I've read on SDN; that DO rotations + residencies are hit or miss and for the most part pretty terrible.

Originally Posted by Sileni

The problem is... MDs aren't going to want the AOA residency slots. As much as I disagree with johnnydrama's superiority complex - he's right about one thing. Most of the AOA residencies are poor at best (I'm being SUPER generous here). I'm in Michigan, and honestly a lot of the residencies *that aren't AOA/ACGME dual accredited* are at community hospitals in the middle of nowhere. The "prestigous" AOA residencies of which a lot are at Botsford Hospital are also kind of a joke, especially because Botsford isn't well respected here in SE Michigan. And by isn't well respected, I mean the general consensus is that it's the worst "large" hospital in SE Michigan. Opening up the AOA residencies to MD students, while a nice gesture doesn't accomplish anything.

I agree with this, but if AOA was opened to MD students, they would probably first become AOA/ACGME and be held to a higher standard. It would take a few years, but eventually the AOA programs would at least all be decent. Plus, it would help with the lower end MD applicants not have to take a year after M4. Plus the FMGs.

Originally Posted by Sileni

The problem is... MDs aren't going to want the AOA residency slots. As much as I disagree with johnnydrama's superiority complex - he's right about one thing. Most of the AOA residencies are poor at best (I'm being SUPER generous here). I'm in Michigan, and honestly a lot of the residencies *that aren't AOA/ACGME dual accredited* are at community hospitals in the middle of nowhere. The "prestigous" AOA residencies of which a lot are at Botsford Hospital are also kind of a joke, especially because Botsford isn't well respected here in SE Michigan. And by isn't well respected, I mean the general consensus is that it's the worst "large" hospital in SE Michigan. Opening up the AOA residencies to MD students, while a nice gesture doesn't accomplish anything.

You're crazy if you think MD students wouldn't like a crack at AOA plastic surg, ortho, optho, rads, ENT, urology, gas etc. The NMRP has already contacted the AOA in the past regarding opening DO residencies to MD students. MD students may not be interested in FM in the middle of nowhere, but you're kidding yourself to think they wouldn't want a shot at AOA slots.

Originally Posted by HalfListic

More and more what I actually realize is that out experiences are a product of our own effort and desire. The experience you are having is not the same for anyone else, though there will be certain shared generalities. A school will have a philosophy, but whether you adopt it, modify it, or call it BS is up to each individual. As a DO you can adopt the general DO philosophies and personalize them to your own practice...no one is stoping you.

I agree with this. Not every DO or DO student will necessarily be as "osteopathic" as others. Just like how some MDs really like to utilize other modalities of care (manual medicine, acupuncture, etc) or a mind/body/spirit approach in their patient care. It is really up to you as far as how much you think the DO philosophy/OMM is BS or how much you like it. A lot of my classmates actively seek out training at workshops and courses taught by the OMM experts in our field... others find their approach to medicine just tends to align with the four tenets. And then there are those who never go to OMM lecture, don't find OMM valuable, and never practice it.

This is fine. To each his/her own. But I think this is a lot of what weakens DO as a separate entity, though, because not everyone does buy into what makes DO unique and this makes us seem disunified when it comes to whether DO really deserves a distinct place in medicine.

But a lot of what's being brought up here is the question of identity. Do we feel that we are/will be osteopathic physicians or do we think we are no different than the MDs?

If the former, then we will have to continue to shoulder to historical burden of our profession (the discrimination, the defending of our training) and make efforts to make clear to society our identity until we are widely recognized as being physicians. If the latter, then bring on a merger.

My personal belief is that if Still and so many others in his day found it worthwhile to create and bolster an alternative to "mainstream medicine," then so should we. Some patients, for whatever reason, can see a difference and do prefer to receive care from a DO... as long as there are people like that then there is still a reason for DO to exist (it validates the osteopathic philosophy). We are "the alternative," not because we're better/worse than MDs or but simply because we exist and are out there with *something* unique to offer. (I really like the Mac vs PC analogy btw.)

Originally Posted by Sileni

The problem is... MDs aren't going to want the AOA residency slots. As much as I disagree with johnnydrama's superiority complex - he's right about one thing. Most of the AOA residencies are poor at best (I'm being SUPER generous here). I'm in Michigan, and honestly a lot of the residencies *that aren't AOA/ACGME dual accredited* are at community hospitals in the middle of nowhere. The "prestigous" AOA residencies of which a lot are at Botsford Hospital are also kind of a joke, especially because Botsford isn't well respected here in SE Michigan. And by isn't well respected, I mean the general consensus is that it's the worst "large" hospital in SE Michigan. Opening up the AOA residencies to MD students, while a nice gesture doesn't accomplish anything.

MD students would take the prestigious specialty spots, leaving less room for DOs in those specialties. This might be a mistake for future fellowship opportunities, but they would still do it.

My issue with the DO degree is not one of "superiority" - it's that the distinction is based off of pseudoscience.

We have enough problems with the CAM MDs, do we really need a whole branch of medicine devoted to the memory and practices of a quack?

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

MD students would take the prestigious specialty spots, leaving less room for DOs in those specialties. This might be a mistake for future fellowship opportunities, but they would still do it.

My issue with the DO degree is not one of "superiority" - it's that the distinction is based off of pseudoscience.

We have enough problems with the CAM MDs, do we really need a whole branch of medicine devoted to the memory and practices of a quack?

I doubt the MD's would get any of the better AOA residencies, so long as DO's are being looked down upon. Gotta protect your own, right?

As for the quack medicine issue, you're kind of coming off sounding like an ignorant d-bag (i.e. normal for you ). There absolutely should be more research into OMM/OMT and its efficacy; and if that's the point you're trying to get across, I doubt many people would argue with you. I'm also pretty sure your "distinction based off of psuedoscience" comment implies that you think DO's are inferior (as evidence-based/scientific studies are clearly superior in your mind).

The rest of your post reads as an "I'm an US MD student so I'm clearly better" stroke-fest, so I won't get into that.

Also,

Stroke-fest... I like that, I will have to use that more often now.

Originally Posted by GimpGenius

I doubt the MD's would get any of the better AOA residencies, so long as DO's are being looked down upon. Gotta protect your own, right?

It's a numbers game. There are simply more MD students. Unless there is still a soft DO-only rule, MD students will fill those spots.

As for the quack medicine issue, you're kind of coming off sounding like an ignorant d-bag (i.e. normal for you ).

AT Still's beliefs were absolutely quackery. There was a lot of it around back then, but glorifying it is a mistake and that is what DO schools have done.

There absolutely should be more research into OMM/OMT and its efficacy; and if that's the point you're trying to get across, I doubt many people would argue with you.

Actually, I think there has been too much wasted research trying to validate it. If manipulations can be helpful, they should be studied completely separately from AT Still's misguided ideas.

I'm also pretty sure your "distinction based off of psuedoscience" comment implies that you think DO's are inferior (as evidence-based/scientific studies are clearly superior in your mind).

Aside from hand waving about treating the whole patient, OMM is the only distinction. And it is absolutely pseudoscience. DO schools are just lower tier MD schools stuffed with bologna - it doesn't inherently make DOs inferior, but it does make the existence of DO as a separate degree unnecessary.

You should also learn how to spell pseudoscience if you intend to practice it.

The rest of your post reads as an "I'm an US MD student so I'm clearly better" stroke-fest, so I won't get into that.

Also,

Which part of my post? I don't need any validation from you.

I just want you guys to ditch osteopathy and raise standards for licensing medical schools and accrediting residency programs to the same levels as the LCME and ACGME.

Ok, 2nd year DO student here

I am one of those people that don't care about the letters behind my name. I want to be a physician and I want to be the best physician I can be. So far, I have not seen any difference between how a DO and MD school could possibly be different. I go to class and study science and review USMLE first aid all the time. I spend 2 hours a week in OMM lecture/Lab in which I learn how to treat certain things. I definitely think OMM helps (on the right patient) but a lot of it has no scientific backing. I have a big problem with lack of scientific evidence and therefore cannot 'dive' in to believing in it.

I also don't think DOs should be defined with OMM. As previous posters said, hardly any graduating DOs even use it. I think it is a GREAT piece of history and I understand that the old guys in the AOA want to try to preserve that history. But at the end of the day, its a new generation and a lot of that stuff gets out-dated. The AOA guys refuse to believe that DOs and MDs are identical and THEY are the reason to the slow progress of our profession. History is for museums and History books. Get with the times and come to a realization that we are both the same, and then move forward. These old croonies at the AOA are just fooling themselves. They remind me of the 60+ yr old southern baptists who believe that homosexuals should go to anti-gay counseling to convince them otherwise. Get with the times AOA. EVERY physician treats the 'whole' body -- whatever that even means.

Sorry for the rant. I just can't stand when the older generation refuses to accept new ideas.

Typos happen; "ditching osteopathy" probably won't. Frankly, as long as people call for eliminating the DO degree without a serious debunking of OMM, they should expect some backlash. Doubly so when those calling for it come off as tools.

Which specific parts of Still's philosophy do you have issue with? Sources would be great, since you seem to be an expert on him, the DO profession, and DO medical schools in general. I'm not trying to get too snippy here, but what I've read and what you've read may be different, and I'd like to get something vaguely constructive out of this thread.

JohnnyDrama: I am a DO student and I, oddly enough, fully agree with everything you say haha.

This line is perfect: Aside from hand waving about treating the whole patient, OMM is the only distinction. And it is absolutely pseudoscience. DO schools are just lower tier MD schools stuffed with bologna - it doesn't inherently make DOs inferior, but it does make the existence of DO as a separate degree unnecessary.

Originally Posted by Vancomycin12

JohnnyDrama: I am a DO student and I, oddly enough, fully agree with everything you say haha.

This line is perfect: Aside from hand waving about treating the whole patient, OMM is the only distinction. And it is absolutely pseudoscience. DO schools are just lower tier MD schools stuffed with bologna - it doesn't inherently make DOs inferior, but it does make the existence of DO as a separate degree unnecessary.

Haha, yeah, I know, many DO students do.

The problem is that SDN is mainly full of people making excuses for the stupid parts.

There are some valid reasons for choosing a DO school over an MD program (money, location, etc), but the "osteopathic philosophy" is not one of them.

My quarrel is with the AOA and the ghost of AT Still, not current DO students.

And to the other poster - no, I'm not an expert on the history of osteopathy. I'm not an expert on healing crystals or Reiki either. I will still call BS when I see it.

I honestly don't care what I'm called. So long as I can get into the residency I want and practice what I want.

It would actually probably be in the DO's best interest not to get the MD-DO, because you're still going to designated DO schools (so bias will still exist in allopathic residencies) and now MD students can take your DO residency slots. While limited, they aren't anything to scoff at.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

And to the other poster - no, I'm not an expert on the history of osteopathy. I'm not an expert on healing crystals or Reiki either. I will still call BS when I see it.

The history of all medicine is BS; let's be honest. Hippocrates and his four humors, arsenic for a cold, etc. Some of the DO's BS just happens to be more recent.

In all seriousness, though, what osteopathic medicine started as and what it is today are two very different things, and that's good. The AOA should get with the program (and hopefully will as younger DO's take the lead), but the degrees are equivalent across the board, legally speaking. I just don't see a merger taking place with the way California played out.

Originally Posted by GimpGenius

The history of all medicine is BS; let's be honest. Hippocrates and his four humors, arsenic for a cold, etc. Some of the DO's BS just happens to be more recent.

In all seriousness, though, what osteopathic medicine started as and what it is today are two very different things, and that's good. The AOA should get with the program (and hopefully will as younger DO's take the lead), but the degrees are equivalent across the board, legally speaking. I just don't see a merger taking place with the way California played out.

You're trying to have it both ways.

Either it's the same and redundant, or it's different and the differences are based off of 19th century pseudoscience.

All I am saying is that it should no longer exist as a degree; schools should offer MDs or nothing.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

You're trying to have it both ways.

Either it's the same and redundant, or it's different and the differences are based off of 19th century pseudoscience.

All I am saying is that it should no longer exist as a degree; schools should offer MDs or nothing.

I'm no expert, but I know a false dichotomy logical fallacy when I see one. lol..

Originally Posted by Sileni

The problem is... MDs aren't going to want the AOA residency slots. As much as I disagree with johnnydrama's superiority complex - he's right about one thing. Most of the AOA residencies are poor at best (I'm being SUPER generous here). I'm in Michigan, and honestly a lot of the residencies *that aren't AOA/ACGME dual accredited* are at community hospitals in the middle of nowhere. The "prestigous" AOA residencies of which a lot are at Botsford Hospital are also kind of a joke, especially because Botsford isn't well respected here in SE Michigan. And by isn't well respected, I mean the general consensus is that it's the worst "large" hospital in SE Michigan. Opening up the AOA residencies to MD students, while a nice gesture doesn't accomplish anything.

I bet MD students would apply to the competitive residencies in the DO world: ophtho, ortho, derm, ect. I mean, the DO ortho program in Chicago rotates at Cook County with residents from UIC and Northwestern on the same clinical team...ya I bet no MD students would want to live in Chicago, operate as an intern....

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

Haha, yeah, I know, many DO students do.

The problem is that SDN is mainly full of people making excuses for the stupid parts.

There are some valid reasons for choosing a DO school over an MD program (money, location, etc), but the "osteopathic philosophy" is not one of them.

My quarrel is with the AOA and the ghost of AT Still, not current DO students.

And to the other poster - no, I'm not an expert on the history of osteopathy. I'm not an expert on healing crystals or Reiki either. I will still call BS when I see it.

For the I agree with you too Johnny, I think many DO students do as well. However I think we disagree on the methodology and other means to achieving a single degree. In my opinion you're a bit too rash and forceful, which while good in many situations is arguably the worst thing possible for a problem like this. It's always better to gradually move into things like this as opposed to forcing your way with the other party.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

Haha, yeah, I know, many DO students do.

The problem is that SDN is mainly full of people making excuses for the stupid parts.

There are some valid reasons for choosing a DO school over an MD program (money, location, etc), but the "osteopathic philosophy" is not one of them.

My quarrel is with the AOA and the ghost of AT Still, not current DO students.

And to the other poster - no, I'm not an expert on the history of osteopathy. I'm not an expert on healing crystals or Reiki either. I will still call BS when I see it.

I think we just became best friends. ^^this line is exactly what myself and 99% of my classmates believe...

Originally Posted by ChiDO

I bet MD students would apply to the competitive residencies in the DO world: ophtho, ortho, derm, ect. I mean, the DO ortho program in Chicago rotates at Cook County with residents from UIC and Northwestern on the same clinical team...ya I bet no MD students would want to live in Chicago, operate as an intern....

Isn't Cook County hospital the one with the DO Urology program with a >50% drop out rates?

Originally Posted by serenade

Isn't Cook County hospital the one with the DO Urology program with a >50% drop out rates?

Cook County is the public hospital in downtown Chicago that the TV show "ER" was based off. I cannot speak in regards to the Urology program nor if it is an MD or DO program. Anyways, I know from friends who rotated their, as a student and resident, you get to do a **** ton since its the public hospital.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

Haha, yeah, I know, many DO students do.

The problem is that SDN is mainly full of people making excuses for the stupid parts.

There are some valid reasons for choosing a DO school over an MD program (money, location, etc), but the "osteopathic philosophy" is not one of them.

My quarrel is with the AOA and the ghost of AT Still, not current DO students.
.

Since you insist on being a part of this discussion, I would just request that back up the things you say.

Your arguments are most often, and quite literally, DO is ridiculous/pseudoscience...I like MD. Thats great, but its just a statement and it doesn't give your opinions the maturity and credence I think they could have. What you might not understand is that your abrasive, subjective ranting style of debate makes it every easy to dismiss any valid points you might make.

For example, I finally found out that we agree on certain things, i.e., the fact that as of now, there is no real difference in the training and education DO and MD students receive. So, why the different degree?

But, you claim that SDN is full of students excusing stupid parts? Where? This is not the case, in any form of majority.

You claim that the DO philosophy is BS. Could you expound? Maybe you mean the tenants of Osteopathy are bogus? The DO philosophy is basically treating the whole person, being involve in patient education and trying to prevent disease along with treating current disease. No BS there that I can see... and good MDs also adhere to this. (its not like DOs say they are the only Drs who do this, they just make it a point of focus)

So again, to you, and anyone else...I ask how would YOU change it? Its easy to criticize. JohnnyD probably mumbles "thats stupid, that sucks" over and over in his sleep Whats difficult is coming up with a solution and then unifying people to accept it enthusiastically.

We can't let ANY tradition blind us from progression...

Because the osteopathic philosophy is not unique to DO's in that regard. It is more or less what every physician does today.
So philosophically there is no real difference.

Originally Posted by serenade

Because the osteopathic philosophy is not unique to DO's in that regard. It is more or less what every physician does today.
So philosophically there is no real difference.

What question was this answering? Im confused why you started out with because...Im not being ironic here either, maybe I missed it?

But, just to reply...I agree. Hopefully you understand that I agree, that most people agree. In fact, because almost every doctor and student agrees with this, it is confusing to call it BS, wouldn't you say?

At the time of its adoption, this philosophy was perhaps a bit ahead of its time though. Now, its common place. But does that make it BS? Multiple companies have similar mission statements and philosophies...does that negate the fact that this is the philosophy DOs choose to rally behind? Its a DO philosophy because DOs emphasize it, not because its unique to them. Its OK if MDs want to emphasize it too...doesn't really change anything and it certainly doesn't magically degrade it to BS

yeah, the philosophy, novel in its day, has been coopted by everyone. lately it has been shamelessly plagiarized wholesale/verbatim by the naturopaths

name change to

MD,DO

lets not give up hope!

Originally Posted by HalfListic

But, you claim that SDN is full of students excusing stupid parts? Where? This is not the case, in any form of majority.

You claim that the DO philosophy is BS. Could you expound? Maybe you mean the tenants of Osteopathy are bogus? The DO philosophy is basically treating the whole person, being involve in patient education and trying to prevent disease along with treating current disease. No BS there that I can see... and good MDs also adhere to this. (its not like DOs say they are the only Drs who do this, they just make it a point of focus)

We can't let ANY tradition blind us from progression...

The President of the AOA came and spoke to our school a few months ago. He said something pretty close to that -- Saying how MDs cant treat the whole person like us DOs do and that they don't take pride in treating the patient, but just the symptoms. This is obviously paraphrased bc I can't remember exactly what he said. I do know that I was VERY angry at him for saying that. He, and the other old fogies at the AOA, are the problem here.

Originally Posted by serenade

Because the osteopathic philosophy is not unique to DO's in that regard. It is more or less what every physician does today.
So philosophically there is no real difference.

Dead on!

Originally Posted by HalfListic

At the time of its adoption, this philosophy was perhaps a bit ahead of its time though. Now, its common place. But does that make it BS? Multiple companies have similar mission statements and philosophies...does that negate the fact that this is the philosophy DOs choose to rally behind? Its a DO philosophy because DOs emphasize it, not because its unique to them. Its OK if MDs want to emphasize it too...doesn't really change anything and it certainly doesn't magically degrade it to BS

Everybody does the same thing as DOs. Therefore, I don't understand why the old folks continue to say we are 'different.' It is complete BS

Originally Posted by oms2

yeah, the philosophy, novel in its day, has been coopted by everyone. lately it has been shamelessly plagiarized wholesale/verbatim by the naturopaths

.

I don't know why this thread is so difficult for some of you to understand...we are saying the same thing. Don't you get it?

I AM SAYING THAT THERE IS NO REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DO AND MD.

I AM SAYING THAT THE CURRENT SITUATION DOESNT WARRANT A SEPARATE DEGREE (HENCE THE MD, DO OPTION...NOT THE ONLY OPTION, BUT A GOOD ONE)

SO DO WE JUST COMPLAIN ABOUT IT, OR DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT? AND PS, WE HAVE OUR ENTORE LIVES TO GET THE BALL ROLLING SO STOP SAYING AS LONG AS _________, NOTHING WILL EVER HAPPEN.

I AM SAYING THE OLD GENERATION (MD AND DO) ARE HANGING ON TO AN OLD FIGHT THAT THE NEW GENERATION WANTS NO PART OF.

THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT, STATE THE OBVIOUS AND GIVE THUMBS US TO ANYONE WHO CAN OBSERVE THE OBVIOUS!

THE QUESTION IS...WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO DO ABOUT IT?

ARE YOU CONTENT WITH STATING THE OBVIOUS AND COMPLAINING ABOUT IT? BECAUSE THATS ALL YOU ARE DOING

...its like talking to children sometimes here

Originally Posted by Vancomycin12

The President of the AOA came and spoke to our school a few months ago. He said something pretty close to that -- Saying how MDs cant treat the whole person like us DOs do and that they don't take pride in treating the patient, but just the symptoms. This is obviously paraphrased bc I can't remember exactly what he said. I do know that I was VERY angry at him for saying that. He, and the other old fogies at the AOA, are the problem here.



Dead on!



Everybody does the same thing as DOs. Therefore, I don't understand why the old folks continue to say we are 'different.' It is complete BS



.

What's unfortunate is that the AOA has done a good job of forcing many DO's down and censoring them. I assure you that had anyone stood up and told him off for being a fool not only would they be expelled for "professionalism" and their ability to practice medicine if they are an AOA trained physician would likely be revoked.
It is unfortunate really, especially when these people continue to perpetuate lies and as their own defense.

Originally Posted by serenade

What's unfortunate is that the AOA has done a good job of forcing many DO's down and censoring them. I assure you that had anyone stood up and told him off for being a fool not only would they be expelled for "professionalism" and their ability to practice medicine if they are an AOA trained physician would likely be revoked.
It is unfortunate really, especially when these people continue to perpetuate lies and as their own defense.

this was a great explanation of a problem. Thanks for the insight...definitely this will be a hurdle to overcome.

One positive note, All members of the AOA are older than me, and so will most likely die before I do...so maybe we can help change the view of the next generations?

Originally Posted by HalfListic

I don't know why this thread is so difficult for some of you to understand...we are saying the same thing. Don't you get it?

I AM SAYING THAT THERE IS NO REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DO AND MD.

I AM SAYING THAT THE CURRENT SITUATION DOESNT WARRANT A SEPARATE DEGREE (HENCE THE MD, DO OPTION...NOT THE ONLY OPTION, BUT A GOOD ONE)

SO DO WE JUST COMPLAIN ABOUT IT, OR DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT? AND PS, WE HAVE OUR ENTORE LIVES TO GET THE BALL ROLLING SO STOP SAYING AS LONG AS _________, NOTHING WILL EVER HAPPEN.

I AM SAYING THE OLD GENERATION (MD AND DO) ARE HANGING ON TO AN OLD FIGHT THAT THE NEW GENERATION WANTS NO PART OF.

THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT, STATE THE OBVIOUS AND GIVE THUMBS US TO ANYONE WHO CAN OBSERVE THE OBVIOUS!

THE QUESTION IS...WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO DO ABOUT IT?

ARE YOU CONTENT WITH STATING THE OBVIOUS AND COMPLAINING ABOUT IT? BECAUSE THATS ALL YOU ARE DOING

...its like talking to children sometimes here

Ok. Nothing is going to change though, threads like this are just voids of complaints, rants, rationalizations, and broken dreams.

Originally Posted by HalfListic

this was a great explanation of a problem. Thanks for the insight...definitely this will be a hurdle to overcome.

One positive note, All members of the AOA are older than me, and so will most likely die before I do...so maybe we can help change the view of the next generations?

Don't expect them to induct members of the board that are any less sane, they will look for those who are crazy for DO. So it will take years of filtering.

Originally Posted by serenade

Don't expect them to induct members of the board that are any less sane, they will look for those who are crazy for DO. So it will take years of filtering.

This is most like the truth. And my rant is probably just one in a countless hoard...but I have a problem with so many people recognizing a problem, complaining about it, but giving no solution.

Just because charge doesn't happen overnight, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And what I feel like a lot of people here don't understand is that someone (a group) needs to initiate and carry out that change.

If we are to stay the same, I want it to make sense.

Also, the same guys that have run the AOA come from a lineage of multiple generations. It's like they keep having children that become DOs and pass on the legacy (kool-aid) to them and make sure they carry it on. It's an endless cycle that I don't really understand.

Also, I am for a degree change. I think everyone should just be under the same physician title. I think the people who practice OMM for a living (all 10 of them) should keep the DO tradition alive bc that's what AT Still would have wanted. As for me, I like to keep up with the latest generation, and that means we are all the same.

Originally Posted by serenade

For the I agree with you too Johnny, I think many DO students do as well. However I think we disagree on the methodology and other means to achieving a single degree. In my opinion you're a bit too rash and forceful, which while good in many situations is arguably the worst thing possible for a problem like this. It's always better to gradually move into things like this as opposed to forcing your way with the other party.

The truth is, since the AOA is a major part of the problem, the solution will probably have to be unilaterally forced upon the DO community by the MD accrediting organizations.

Shutting off ACGME fellowships is a start, followed by shutting off ACGME residencies. This will suck for one generation of DO students, but they will force their schools to convert to MD.

Maybe it can be done more gradually, but it looks like this method is already in the works.

Originally Posted by mashmetoo

I'm no expert, but I know a false dichotomy logical fallacy when I see one. lol..

It's not a fallacy.

Either it's the same (and redundant) or it's different. That's a tautology, not a fallacy.

If it's different, then what differences are there besides "treating the whole patient" (which isn't a real distinction unless you mean it in a BS holistic sense) and OMM (also BS)?

And I don't understand why people keep calling OMM outdated - would you say the same thing about a physician trying to balance humors?

Originally Posted by Vancomycin12

Also, the same guys that have run the AOA come from a lineage of multiple generations. It's like they keep having children that become DOs and pass on the legacy (kool-aid) to them and make sure they carry it on. It's an endless cycle that I don't really understand.

Also, I am for a degree change. I think everyone should just be under the same physician title. I think the people who practice OMM for a living (all 10 of them) should keep the DO tradition alive bc that's what AT Still would have wanted. As for me, I like to keep up with the latest generation, and that means we are all the same.

...me too. DOs broke away to avoid stagnant tradition. So, why let their own tradition hinder forward progression?

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

The truth is, since the AOA is a major part of the problem, the solution will probably have to be unilaterally forced upon the DO community by the MD accrediting organizations.

Shutting off ACGME fellowships is a start, followed by shutting off ACGME residencies. This will suck for one generation of DO students, but they will force their schools to convert to MD.

Maybe it can be done more gradually, but it looks like this method is already in the works.

That is one solution...it maybe too drastic to actually happen. I am also of the mind that thinks can change is usually incremental. But, I don't really have any better option than you suggest here so I can't really argue.

I still think an MD/DO would be easier to achieve, but it no doubt will be difficult.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

The truth is, since the AOA is a major part of the problem, the solution will probably have to be unilaterally forced upon the DO community by the MD accrediting organizations.

Shutting off ACGME fellowships is a start, followed by shutting off ACGME residencies. This will suck for one generation of DO students, but they will force their schools to convert to MD.

Maybe it can be done more gradually, but it looks like this method is already in the works.

And what if the AOA fights this by shutting down schools or forcing the numbers of students to equal the amount of AOA residencies. The reality is that the big schools have enough residencies to suffice them and their students so if they want they could retain their DO status. So there is a potentially for it not to work out.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

It's not a fallacy.

Either it's the same (and redundant) or it's different.

That's a false dichotomy once again.

A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option. The options may be a position that is between the two extremes (such as when there are shades of grey) or may be a completely different alternative.
False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice (such as, in some contexts, the assertion that "if you are not with us, you are against us").

But I'm glad you are not the one calling the shots for DO licensing, there'd be riots on the streets lol..

Originally Posted by serenade

And what if the AOA fights this by shutting down schools or forcing the numbers of students to equal the amount of AOA residencies. The reality is that the big schools have enough residencies to suffice them and their students so if they want they could retain their DO status. So there is a potentially for it not to work out.

This would be a unilateral action from the MD side, so from their perspective closing DO schools would not be a major issue.

Some might even prefer to open new MD schools than convert old DO schools.

The AOA shutting down DO schools would not make a huge amount of sense from their perspective, even if there were not enough residency spots for their graduates.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

This would be a unilateral action from the MD side, so from their perspective closing DO schools would not be a major issue.

Some might even prefer to open new MD schools than convert old DO schools.

The AOA shutting down DO schools would not make a huge amount of sense from their perspective, even if there were not enough residency spots for their graduates.

Actually for them it may be easier to cut off a few fingers, but save the hand and retain power. They could shutdown some schools or let the lower DO schools and let the older ones simply remain and for them to put some more funding into fellowships and other specialties. However generally this won't happen as it will never be unilateral especially from states where DO's and MD's are under similar mother insitutes i.e like MSU, UMDNJ, OSU,OUCOM, etc. And finally doing this will not occur until MD students fill up all the ACGME residencies, because otherwise the only alternative will be for IMG's to fill them up, which is worse than having DO's.

So basically... if you want an MD degree work hard and go to MD School. If you want a DO work hard and go to DO school. If you want to not work hard, be born rich and go to Caribbean MD school? That's basically all I've gotten out of this.

Originally Posted by Capltd29

So basically... if you want an MD degree work hard and go to MD School. If you want a DO work hard and go to DO school. If you want to not work hard, be born rich and go to Caribbean MD school? That's basically all I've gotten out of this.

Spot on, Brother! Another well-intentioned thread bites the MD vs DO dust...

Originally Posted by Capltd29

So basically... if you want an MD degree work hard and go to MD School. If you want a DO work hard and go to DO school. If you want to not work hard, be born rich and go to Caribbean MD school? That's basically all I've gotten out of this.

This actually made me laugh... your logic is undeniable.

Keep DO separate and eliminate the COMLEX.

Originally Posted by johnnydrama

And I don't understand why people keep calling OMM outdated - would you say the same thing about a physician trying to balance humors?

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure the "balancing of humors" is as outdated as diagnosing a woman who cannot conceive a child as "having serpents occupying the womb"....

Originally Posted by mashmetoo

That's a false dichotomy once again.

A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option. The options may be a position that is between the two extremes (such as when there are shades of grey) or may be a completely different alternative.
False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice (such as, in some contexts, the assertion that "if you are not with us, you are against us").

But I'm glad you are not the one calling the shots for DO licensing, there'd be riots on the streets lol..

Its important to note that not all "either/or" clauses automatically fit this....

Originally Posted by serenade

Isn't Cook County hospital the one with the DO Urology program with a >50% drop out rates?

thats DMC