That's not offensive at all, and I now see what you're saying. As I said earlier, I wasn't even aware that chiro business courses come up as a topic of conversation/debate, but it's certainly possible they do. I'll say this without checking my facts (because I don't really give a crap
), but those business courses are done toward the end of the curriculum during clinical phase. So it's not like "Chiro Marketing 101" is displacing "Neuroanatomy" or something. And if memory serves (again, things may have changed these days), these courses were no more than a couple hours per week, not an afternoon every day.
The issue of spreading "the same amount of anatomy" out over 3 semesters is misleading. As you know better than I, medical school curriculum is set up in blocks where you concentrate on a subject almost exclusively for awhile, then move on to another topic. Chiro school is set up in a more traditional manner, where students will take many classes over the course of a semester. As such, while chiro students are studying anatomy they are also studying physiology/pathophysiology, biochemistry, neuroanatomy, biomechanics, chiro technique lab courses, etc. It's not surprising, then, that "the same amount of anatomy" gets spread over 3 semesters.
It varies school by school (for both chiro and med). I've looked up curricula that have business practice courses each semester of training. Palmer has that (at least this is how I interpret the fundamentals of practice and other such courses).
And my medical school isn't on a block system. While I know they are out there, I don't think that is the norm. We take 3-5 basic science courses at once along with our 1 fluff class which is where we learn interview and physical exam skills. I'm not trying to be overly antagonistic here, but just to compare with Palmer (which I use as a gold standard, forgive me if you disagree)
Anatomy and embryology (palmer 2 classes) = anatomy (med)
histology/cell and cardiac phys, renal phys, endo/repro phys (palmer 5/6 classes) = physiology (1 class, they double dip for the path stuff two having separate sections for each system)
There two classes per semester (ish...) for exams = we actually learn the exam stuff largely in small groups on our own time.
I am seeing at least two different "chiro practice" and "philosophy" courses.....
There might be some forgiveness in there because we will often have multiple lectures from the same class in a day, and usually more than 1 in a week so if someone decides to dice it up differently it is still somewhat of a moot point. The big difference is not what they do within one block/quarter/semester whatever, but that anatomy, neuro, and path are taking at least an academic year, and sometimes up to a year and a half to complete.
The thing that gets me in the comparison, is that there simply isn't anything in any of the anatomy books, neuro books, or phys books that we did not cover to the extent of the depth it was made available within the book, and we did it in 1 semester for each of these subjects with the other classes running at the same time. Now, when someone wants to validate their educational experience by saying "we did a lot"... fine
good job, gold star, all that jazz. But if they want to validate it by comparing to my education by saying "We had 3x as much anatomy as you did" well.... personally I view the alternative as medical education + training wheels. Doing the same amount of work in 3x the time isn't impressive so basically I just invite such people to keep their mouths shut before they say something dumb
Question for you.... you guys dont prescribe nor will you ever take a knife to someone or do a biopsy (as far as I am aware) so why do they have you guys doing (palmer west) a whole course on renal physiology (that was about 3 weeks for us
) and histology? I am all for background and foundational information but it seems largely irrelevant.
p.s. this isn't just against DCs, nor is it some ego padding "nobody can do what a doctor does" sort of thing. The same has held true in conversations with PAs, NPs, DVM, DDS, RNs, DPTs, whatever. With medicine as the perceived pinnacle of health training in terms of difficulty, selectivity, whatever (I think you can agree that this is true, focus on the words "perceived" or "selectivity if you must
) many people not in that system will feel compelled to validate their choice in front of people who are in that system - this comes from the misconception that we automatically look down on people who don't choose to be MDs, as if we think they weren't good enough to get into an MD school so went elsewhere. I can't even begin to list the people I've known who, upon hearing I am in med school" tell me "yeah, I was gunna do that too, but then I decided not to because of bleh bleh bleh, and figured that working as a cashier at the mall was a better fit"
ok dude...
whatever, I suspect pretty strongly that this guy wouldn't feel compelled to rationalize his life choices to his friend, the hair dresser....
Basically it boils down to this... like what you do, and don't pretend like you (anyone) know my situation and I won't feel compelled to point out the inaccuracies in comparison
And one more thing. Earlier you mentioned whipping it out, and just now you talk about measuring sticks. What's the deal??
I am honestly not sure
" gets met with "yes, but they spread the same amount of anatomy over 3 semesters and spend half an afternoon each day learning the things that people with a BA in business learned 
