SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads) I know ur against it lol. and the informed consent thing is a valid point. What I was mostly getting at is only that i think the motivating factors for this are suspect. It strikes me as substanceless re-branding and I think it is a little ridiculous. It would be like going into OB/Gyn and calling myself a gynecological surgeon just because there is an over-representation of procedures as compared to other clinical specialists. The implication is that 2 doctorate degrees were earned and that really isnt true. OMM is not a doctorate in and of itself which is why i said i didnt have an issue with moving to an MD/DO degree if it is understood that the DO portion is similar in impact to a distinction tract or "focus". DO schools cost substantially more than MD schools in the vast majority of cases. ive made this exact same argument in antoher thread we were in on. I do believe that the more highly selective schools have on average a more successful student. I think the students at hopkins or northwestern on average have a higher ability than the students at my school. That doesn't mean that every one of them is smarter than every one of us, and since we are talking about a collective of bodies and not a pure continuum it follows that there will very likely be students in a lower tier group which are more able than those in a higher tier group. The difference in mcat between MD and DO is about 5 on average? If we accept MCAT's predictive value with error, and also acknowledge the range around the ~25 and ~30 needed for DO and MD respectively it is likely that a significant portion of the students overlap. This is why I am comfortable applying this logic widely because I understand that I am subject to it as well when I compare myself against students in the oober top schools. And this is why i didnt want to use the word "backup", because my school was my first pick for me. I would have loved to go to hopkins but it wasnt in the cards. I dont feel like my school is a backup and neither should you or anyone regardless of school - and if you do then you dun messed up. That said, most of us stacked up our resumes, took a good look at them, and then shot our applications out where we thought we had the best chance of getting in. Think about it like an odds ratio from a cohort study. There are plenty of exposures which will increase or decrease OR by whatever levels... Just because I have said exposure does not mean that I will have the outcome. There is an OR related to MCAT score as far as success in school goes, and this is indicated in the correlative studies between MCAT and boards and also the links i posted (which I will defend in a minute) I put a couple words in bold up there. "good" - this is an absolute term. Nobody has suggested or even implied that any current DO student will not make a "good" doctor. The only possible implication that has been made is that increases in MCAT can make one "better", but this does not make anyone below that mark un-"good". and "necessarily" -you are right, it doesnt necessarily predict ability. That is an almost direct paraphrase of what I have been saying about it being a predictor of ability vs an absolute scale. using the word "necessarily" like you did is a qualifier which only indicates a set of exceptions to the rule, but does not negate it. if, instead, what you meant to say was "the MCAT does not predict ability" that is different. "necessarily" means that there is some truth to it but we cannot make specific conclusions from it. it's like a bad p-value the underlined thing I agree with and I am not sure what I said to make you think I dont. This is exactly what I have been getting at. as I said here and in other threads, "better" and "worse" do not equal "good" and "bad". relative vs absolute terminology.... more of this happens here where you say ya, nobody is arguing that nor was anything to the contrary even so much as suggested. if you recall, much of what we are talking about is in response only to the absurdity of the "we have to do more" statement. It comes up in any comparison. PA is one w the courses vs time artument, had a chiropractor tell me that they do more neuro than med students do.... basically I just don't want to be told by someone that I have consistently outscored that they have to do something harder or more challenging or requiring of higher ability. that's ridiculous. Other such comparisons are just skewed data... vet or dental school harder to get into than med? well.... there is a supply and demand thing going on there if true at all, by the simple fact that raw scores (just GPA, although awhile back I saw plenty of anecdotal evidence of people with lower MCATs going back and destroying the DAT to pursue a different career) are higher among medial applicants. i.e. while the average dental student might face more competition, the scores of the average medical applicant are well above the average dental applicant and therefore ease of entry is being dumbed down to simple #accepted/#applied or something to that effect. The point being - lots and lots of statements get made which have implications that are exaggerated at best. The DO = MD+ thing is one of them. These studies arent perfect, but they arent as vastly different as you believe. The AAMC study gives academic reasons only so we have those numbers. 1.5% by year 4 or ~0.375% per year. Im also not sure if these numbers are MD only or MD+DO, because the AAMC publishes MCAT numbers for both groups. But if we look at the AACOM data and apply a little common sense.... Non academic reasons for withdrawl or leave of absense - death, illness, whatever.... The trend goes from ~3% to ~2% to 1% and then back up to 2% pretty regularly for all of the years sampled across the entire country. Unless you are suggesting that there is a statistically significant decrease in illness, family deaths, uh..... bank robberies? for 3rd year DO students as compared to other years, the trend is very likely to be academic. The published numbers for dismissal vs other show about even spread at 1.5% each, and these numbers are weighted towards the first two years. your argument is to basically treat those numbers as not having any academic component but id argue that leaves of absence can have academic motivators just as they can also not. Dismissal often has academic reasons. Withdrawl isnt necessarily (theres that word again....) different than drop-out. But the point is - there is no reason that I can think of other than academics to yield such a reproducible pattern. As I said, the alternative is that you claim a nearly 200% increase in the chance of "Professionalism, Death, Serious accident/injury/disability, Change your mind about medical school, Family needs, etc." in MS1 year vs MS3, and I would suggest that these non-academic reasons have no reason not to be evenly distributed across the years. ergo the trends are academic in nature. its an assumption.... but I am fairly comfortable with it and again I think you tend to react strongly to examples of extreme. IF MCAT predicts success to even a minute degree, then the carib attrition rates, DO attrition rates, and MD attrition rates are all just a statistical probability based on that prediction.