Dr. Norman Gevitz Predicts end of Osteopathic Field due to merger

[Goro]

They're both unions, you know. But "Association" sounds much nicer than "Union".

I'm pretty sure that there is a way higher percentage of DO's in the AOA than MD's and DO's in the AMA. AMA membership has been falling for decades. It is under 15% of physicians.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Jwalker]

Look the fact is the AOA is a failing organization. Gevitz is correct when he predicts membership numbers for the AOA will continue to fall. It's their pathetic policy of sitting on their butts that lead to this happening. Why are there crap residencies? Because the people in charge let that happen. Why are there hardly any DO fellowships? Same answer. Why are DO schools linked entirely to volunteer faculty and no brand name teaching institutions? Because the AOA let it happen.

I'm not a fan of the AOA. I'm a fan of being a physician and being a damn good physician, DO or MD. If ensuring I get access to better facilities means becoming a part of the AMA because the AOA is doing nothing to make it a reality, so be it.

Is this a troll? AMA? Really? LOL

 

[DrEnderW]

I'm not a fan of the AOA. I'm a fan of being a physician and being a damn good physician, DO or MD. If ensuring I get access to better facilities means becoming a part of the AMA because the AOA is doing nothing to make it a reality, so be it.

It could just be a typo and you meant ACGME, but I want to clarify for others reading that the AMA is not the MD equivalent of the AOA. I'm an AMA member as a medical student... it's just a physician action group. It includes both MDs and DOs and has nothing to do with granting accreditation.

 

[jl lin]

I don't know. Seems weird to me to have two different med schools/physicians. You can be MD and be very holistic-oriented. I'm for freedom in school philosophies, but I am not getting the value/point of this. IF someone wants to learn OMM, can't they take that separately? Wouldn't medicine and pts be served better by being unified etc? At the end of the day it is like MD to DO is like who you are routing for in the Army/Navy Game. In fact, the two MSs/physicians have more in common than the Army and Navy. Is it about some kind of bragging rights? Is it like there is some goofy status thing? And for pt's and the GP, it's just confusing.

I just don't see the point in two separate schools and titles if standards, licenses, and certifications are ultimately the same. Both DO and MD have much more in common than any small differences.

 

[GUH]

I don't know. Seems weird to me to have two different med schools/physicians. You can be MD and be very holistic-oriented. I'm for freedom in school philosophies, but I am not getting the value/point of this. IF someone wants to learn OMM, can't they take that separately? Wouldn't medicine and pts be served better by being unified etc? At the end of the day it is like MD to DO is like who you are routing for in the Army/Navy Game. In fact, the two MSs/physicians have more in common than the Army and Navy. Is it about some kind of bragging rights? Is it like there is some goofy status thing? And for pt's and the GP, it's just confusing.

I just don't see the point in two separate schools and titles if standards, licenses, and certifications are ultimately the same. Both DO and MD have much more in common than any small differences.

If you don't want to be a DO, then go to an MD school. Problem solved.

 

[keevwu]

If you don't want to be a DO, then go to an MD school. Problem solved.

about a thousand other factors go into that. it's not that simple

 

[GUH]

about a thousand other factors go into that. it's not that simple

I didn't want to be a DDS or a JD, so I didn't apply to those programs. Nor did I apply to MD programs with the intent to work from the inside to eliminate the MD degree. It's actually not that complicated.

 

[DrEnderW]

about a thousand other factors go into that. it's not that simple

I have to agree with @GUH on this one. It is that simple... Don't attend a DO school if you don't want to be a DO. No one is making you go that route, it's a choice the whole way.

 

[DocEspana]

It could just be a typo and you meant ACGME, but I want to clarify for others reading that the AMA is not the MD equivalent of the AOA. I'm an AMA member as a medical student... it's just a physician action group. It includes both MDs and DOs and has nothing to do with granting accreditation.

The AMA does have a major influence over the ACGME, as its partial owner. The only way for a medical student (or resident) to get any influence in the ACGME is through the AMA. As a full physician you can join through other ways.

B-T-Dubs. Thats what I do (or did) at the AMA. Got involved in the undergraduate medical education, graduate education, and acgme wings of the AMA.

 

[hallowmann]

I don't know. Seems weird to me to have two different med schools/physicians. You can be MD and be very holistic-oriented. I'm for freedom in school philosophies, but I am not getting the value/point of this. IF someone wants to learn OMM, can't they take that separately? Wouldn't medicine and pts be served better by being unified etc? At the end of the day it is like MD to DO is like who you are routing for in the Army/Navy Game. In fact, the two MSs/physicians have more in common than the Army and Navy. Is it about some kind of bragging rights? Is it like there is some goofy status thing? And for pt's and the GP, it's just confusing.

I just don't see the point in two separate schools and titles if standards, licenses, and certifications are ultimately the same. Both DO and MD have much more in common than any small differences.

Do you not know much about the history of medicine in the US? There's a very clear historical reason why two exist, and it namely involves the professions not getting along with one another, despite the way things are now.

 

[jl lin]

Do you not know much about the history of medicine in the US? There's a very clear historical reason why two exist, and it namely involves the professions not getting along with one another, despite the way things are now.

Yes. I've read of these things a while ago. It's still seems like a waste. But I dislike needless disharmony. Isn't there a bigger goal here?

 

[jl lin]

If you don't want to be a DO, then go to an MD school. Problem solved.

Is it helpful to make unfounded assumptions based on general opinions?
My confusion has nothing to do w/ which school I attend. Wow. Weird.

 

[jl lin]

about a thousand other factors go into that. it's not that simple

Shoot I don't even understand the relevance of GUH's comment. How'd it become personal? Just saying it's kind of strange to be at odds and then say "we're not." And then say, "but we are." Then, "No. We do that same things." It's confusung and seems unnecessary.

But, whatever I guess. Carry on w/ divisions if it beats Fantasy Football.

 

[hallowmann]

Yes. I've read of these things a while ago. It's still seems like a waste. But I dislike needless disharmony. Isn't there a bigger goal here?

You don't seem to have really understood it then. Them being on good terms is a relatively contemporary phenomenon. Neither have brought up fully merging in anytime recently. Right now they're just dealing with GME. There are lots of different organizations and groups involved.

 

[jl lin]

I didn't say anything about having a preference for DO or MD. I'm all about the person in the suit and not the suit. Just don't understand the need for differences when edu is essentially the same. I mean it's not like the difference between a LPN and an RN. I mean don't both DOs and MDs do 99.9% same thing in any given field of medicine? Sigh. Humans be complicated.

 

[jl lin]

You don't seem to have really understood it then. Them being on good terms is a relatively contemporary phenomenon. Neither have brought up fully merging in anytime recently. Right now they're just dealing with GME. There are lots of different organizations and groups involved.

Saying it shouldn't matter...but again, whatever. I mean geez, do the different schools make you "choose sides?"
At some point most professions and occupations have to choose to unite or suffer loss/die. Personally I think most students do not care. Just as long as they are well educated and become physicians and get into good residency programs, I don't think they really care that much.

 

[icevermin]

[deleted]

 

[icevermin]

[deleted]

 

[GUH]

I just want to add, this guy GUH is a mindless troll who literally cannot offer anything beyond a "that guy is an idiot" or a "show the meta data proof that shows higher clinical standards correlate to a better education"

Ignore that guy.

Because, like, screw all that boring "science" and "evidence" stuff, like, right? If that annoys you, then follow your own advice and put me on your ignore list. So far it's clear that you haven't done it.

 

[DrEnderW]

Yeah so I used the AMA as a blanket term because I blanked on the ACGME. If you're going to go off and complain about whether I (correctly) used ACGME or (incorrectly) used AMA rather than address the underlying point, you're no different than anybody else who is *content* with the status quo of how DO education is run and maintained. Oh and by the way, the AMA is a signatory to the ACGME.

Relax... I clearly said it was probably a typo and simply stated I was correcting it for other users reading, many of whom are pre-meds. I wasn't "complaining" and there was no harm done.

 

[Mad Jack]

Because, like, screw all that boring "science" and "evidence" stuff, like, right? If that annoys you, then follow your own advice and put me on your ignore list. So far it's clear that you haven't done it.

Says the guy who's backing osteopathy...

Seriously, I'm down with OMM, but the evidence isn't there. Just like I believe better clinical education leads to better physicians even though the evidence isn't there. Some studies are difficult to do, while others are so obvious that they basically need not be done because it would be a waste of cash. Of course a better clinical education with a wider variety of pathology will produce a more competent and well-rounded physician- anyone who says less education and pathology=better physician is a fool.

 

[GUH]

Says the guy who's backing osteopathy...

Seriously, I'm down with OMM, but the evidence isn't there. Just like I believe better clinical education leads to better physicians even though the evidence isn't there. Some studies are difficult to do, while others are so obvious that they basically need not be done because it would be a waste of cash. Of course a better clinical education with a wider variety of pathology will produce a more competent and well-rounded physician- anyone who says less education and pathology=better physician is a fool.

If you want to advocate for significant change in the way DOs are educated, it's best to come up with good, measurable evidence proving why. Apparently icevermin thinks that's too much of a burden and that policy decisions should be made off of hunches and feelings.

 

[Mad Jack]

If you want to advocate for significant change in the way DOs are educated, it's best to come up with good, measurable evidence proving why. Apparently icevermin thinks that's too much of a burden and that policy decisions should be made off of hunches and feelings.

It could be argued that Step 2 scores are enough to show that DOs aren't up to par in regard to their clinical education, as they're the best indicator of clinical decision making we've got. In any case, the LCME isn't going to fund a multimillion dollar study to prove that another organization that they want nothing to do with is doing things wrong, and the COCA wouldn't want to do anything that would risk it becoming obsolete, so such a study will never happen. The reason such research doesn't occur isn't because it shouldn't be done, it's because no one that has the money will benefit in any appreciable way. If a study can hurt you but not help you, why do it? (Because it's ethical, obviously, but ethics take a back seat to politics 99% of the time in the upper echelons of medicine.)

 

[NurWollen]

It could be argued that Step 2 scores are enough to show that DOs aren't up to par in regard to their clinical education, as they're the best indicator of clinical decision making we've got. In any case, the LCME isn't going to fund a multimillion dollar study to prove that another organization that they want nothing to do with is doing things wrong, and the COCA wouldn't want to do anything that would risk it becoming obsolete, so such a study will never happen. The reason such research doesn't occur isn't because it shouldn't be done, it's because no one that has the money will benefit in any appreciable way. If a study can hurt you but not help you, why do it? (Because it's ethical, obviously, but ethics take a back seat to politics 99% of the time in the upper echelons of medicine.)

That could well be true, but it could also be (and this is a tangent from the point you were trying to make) that MD schools give their students more time to study for it. A classmate and I were just discussing a common aquantence who is at a state MD school in the northeast. They finish MS2 in February, start MS3 in late March or April, and then at the end of 3rd year get a whole month off to study for step 2.

Interestingly, my school is changing the MS2 schedule for the class of 2018 (one year behind me) so that the they get dedicated time off 3rd year for step 2/level 2 study.

 

[hallowmann]

Saying it shouldn't matter...but again, whatever. I mean geez, do the different schools make you "choose sides?"
At some point most professions and occupations have to choose to unite or suffer loss/die. Personally I think most students do not care. Just as long as they are well educated and become physicians and get into good residency programs, I don't think they really care that much.

You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. You act like there's been this huge back and forth pushing for unity, when in reality the topic of unity is relatively contemporary when it comes to the history of American medicine. There was no back and forth. Sure there was yelling from both sides that their way is better, but not until relatively recently have they been willing to deal with eachother.

If you know the history, you should know very well why there's two different medical degrees in the US. I'm not making a comment as to whether there "should" be two, simply that your shock of two existing is unfounded.

 

[ERK123]

[/QUOTE]Seriously, I'm down with OMM, but the evidence isn't there. Just like I believe better clinical education leads to better physicians even though the evidence isn't there. Some studies are difficult to do, while others are so obvious that they basically need not be done because it would be a waste of cash. Of course a better clinical education with a wider variety of pathology will produce a more competent and well-rounded physician- anyone who says less education and pathology=better physician is a fool.[/QUOTE]

http://www.bmj.com/content/327/7429/1459

 

[NurWollen]

I don't think you understand the uniqueness of the history between DO and MD. I c


http://www.bmj.com/content/327/7429/1459

What the...?

 

[ERK123]

What the...?

Sorry I am not sure why the "I don't think you understand the uniqueness of the history between DO and MD. I c" is in my response. I started writing that in response to another post yesterday! I only meant to include the BMJ article.

 

[NurWollen]

Sorry I am not sure why the "I don't think you understand the uniqueness of the history between DO and MD. I c" is in my response. I started writing that in response to another post yesterday! I only meant to include the BMJ article.

Oh I was just quoted the parachute effectiveness research paper. Must of had an expert grant writer to convince someone to fund that paper.

 

[ERK123]

Oh I was just quoted the parachute effectiveness research paper. Must of had an expert grant writer to convince someone to fund that paper.

I highly doubt a grant was necessary to write this paper. It is a very well known paper.

 

[jl lin]

You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. You act like there's been this huge back and forth pushing for unity, when in reality the topic of unity is relatively contemporary when it comes to the history of American medicine. There was no back and forth. Sure there was yelling from both sides that their way is better, but not until relatively recently have they been willing to deal with eachother.

If you know the history, you should know very well why there's two different medical degrees in the US. I'm not making a comment as to whether there "should" be two, simply that your shock of two existing is unfounded.

LOL. How do you objectively ascertain a sense of "shock" from me on this issue? You don't have to be a lawyer or a master in logical reasoning to see the problem with hasty generalizations, false assumptions, and such.

It really doesn't matter. People have gotten and still get crazy over midlevel invasion, etc. That's a relatively new phenomenon as well. If people can get unified over that issue, it would also behoove them to unify over education and title for physicians.

But I'm over this now. I contended that it's confusing and less productive than unification, but I am certainly not going to change this situation by posting here on SDN. My opinion is simply my opinion.

I really don't think the world is going to explode if this isn't solved today or tomorrow. As with most issues of politics, sadly, the thing will move on points of money and power. So goes the way of frail humans.

And now, I am over it.

 

[icevermin]

[deleted]

 

[ERK123]

If you need a funded study to demonstrate that higher quality pre-clinical and clinical education correlates to a better physician, maybe you should rather pick a social science than this field. It's such an obvious correlation it should be something you don't even need to think about.

Good luck defining "Higher quality pre clinical and clinical education" and "Better physician". There is no way that such a research question would be easy to answer.

 

[Oo Cipher oO]

I just want to add, this guy GUH is a mindless troll who literally cannot offer anything beyond a "that guy is an idiot" or a "show the meta data proof that shows higher clinical standards correlate to a better education"

Ignore that guy.

GUH has been a valuable member of the Osteopathic forum (and SDN) for years. He/she often has the courage to argue the counter opinion on the many threads critical of osteopathic medicine when no one else will. A forum is benefited when it contains a diversity of opinions or else it just become an echo chamber and good for no one.

 

[NurWollen]

GUH has been a valuable member of the Osteopathic forum (and SDN) for years. He/she often has the courage to argue the counter opinion on the many threads critical of osteopathic medicine when no one else will. A forum is benefited when it contains a diversity of opinions or else it just become an echo chamber and good for no one.

+1

I disagree with GUH on some things but his opinions are sincere and well reasoned and have caused me on multiple occasions to reevaluate my own opinions to make sure they are truly defensible or if I'm just going with the SDN grain.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

GUH has been a valuable member of the Osteopathic forum (and SDN) for years. He/she often has the courage to argue the counter opinion on the many threads critical of osteopathic medicine when no one else will. A forum is benefited when it contains a diversity of opinions or else it just become an echo chamber and good for no one.

Diversity of opinion is important. Idiocy despite evidence doesn't bring anything to the table. It's like getting a typical Republican in a pad panel about the evidence for global warming.

 

[NurWollen]

You realize that study was satire? The BMJ has a long history of posting satire in their december issue.

It seems obvious now that you mention it. I guess I need to read the BMJ more often.

 

[NurWollen]

Diversity of opinion is important. Idiocy despite evidence doesn't bring anything to the table. It's like getting a typical Republican in a pad panel about the evidence for global warming.

Sooo, diversity of opinion is important as long as the opinions aren't too.... well, diverse?

 

[NurWollen]

It is a funny critique of medicine's crude understanding of statistics, trial rigor, and the obsession of evidence based medicine with the "gold standard" of RCTs.

And it's a critique that deserves to be made. For all our talk of evidence and statistics, we get precious little statistical training in med school, at least at mine.

 

[ERK123]

And it's a critique that deserves to be made. For all our talk of evidence and statistics, we get precious little statistical training in med school, at least at mine.

I think this is pretty common in medical schools. I have been told over and over again that most doctors are not good scientists (Just don't tell the MD's!)

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Sooo, diversity of opinion is important as long as the opinions aren't too.... well, diverse?

Sounds cute being put that way, but any reasonable person knows the difference between diverse opinions and stupid things being said.

 

[Jwalker]

Sooo, diversity of opinion is important as long as the opinions aren't too.... well, diverse?

+1

 

[hallowmann]

Sounds cute being put that way, but any reasonable person knows the difference between diverse opinions and stupid things being said.

I think the point is that the line between diverse opinions and stupid things being said is relatively subjective. Who decides what's stupid and what's diverse? Not everyone agrees on those definitions. We may each have a perspective on the difference, but our individual perspectives most likely do not perfectly overlap.

 

[DD214_DOC]

I did an ACGME residency and fellowship, and nobody knows or cares what my degree was. In fact, the ABPN printed MD on my certificate because the program assumed I was one.

The only thing I have ever used OMM principles or techniques for is to give my wife an awesome massage to cure my acute sexual intercourse deficiency. I guess it has been pretty good for that.

Read between the lines with this Gevitz guy. If the DO thing goes away as a result of the merger, his life's work becomes meaningless and his legacy disappears. It's self interest.

 

[Mehd School]

The only thing I have ever used OMM principles or techniques for is to give my wife an awesome massage to cure my acute sexual intercourse deficiency.

A+