Save The Merger

[DocVapor]

Gotcha. That kind of clears it up. So the outlook for name change in the future is not so good haha

Yeah, probably not going to happen anytime soon. We still get all the benefits that being a VT student would get us, and because our campus is within visual distance of VT, actually probably get more out of the VT partnership than VTC students do (in some ways).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[hallowmann]

No, VTC is a public-private institution. VCOM is also non-profit, and from what I understand, the SC campus was VCOM's idea, and they weren't interested in opening a 3rd campus until Auburn approached VCOM about it.

http://www.vcom.edu/aboutvcom/history.html

Wait so now there's a VCOM Auburn? When did I miss that? So now we have 3 sizeable private stand-alone COMs with 3 good-sized campuses (LECOM, Touro, and VCOM). No wonder that gap between campuses and schools that AACOM is talking about keeps increasing.

 

[DocVapor]

Wait so now there's a VCOM Auburn? When did I miss that? So now we have 3 sizeable private stand-alone COMs with 3 good-sized campuses (LECOM, Touro, and VCOM). No wonder that gap between campuses and schools that AACOM is talking about keeps increasing.

Yeah, they are now recruiting for the first class to start next year: http://www.vcom.edu/news/2014-05-06-auburn-campus-approval.html

Also, for fun:
http://www.vcom.edu/news/auburn campus webcam.html

Looks like they still have to put the finishing touches on it.

 

[hallowmann]

Yeah, they are now recruiting for the first class to start next year: http://www.vcom.edu/news/2014-05-06-auburn-campus-approval.html

Also, for fun:
http://www.vcom.edu/news/auburn campus webcam.html

Looks like they still have to put the finishing touches on it.

I hope they're expanding residencies. I talked to one of the guys who works for their OPTI (OMNEE) and it seemed like they expanded a little, but with the addition of both LUCOM and VCOM-Auburn, that might be a meaningless expansion. It'll be after us (fortunately for us), but that'll be another 300-some DOs (both schools) looking for residency in 2019.

 

[NurWollen]

I hope they're expanding residencies. I talked to one of the guys who works for their OPTI (OMNEE) and it seemed like they expanded a little, but with the addition of both LUCOM and VCOM-Auburn, that might be a meaningless expansion. It'll be after us (fortunately for us), but that'll be another 300-some DOs (both schools) looking for residency in 2019.

You're c/o 2017 like me right?

 

[hallowmann]

You're c/o 2017 like me right?

Yeah, I'm at LECOM, but I talked to some OMNEE reps not too long ago.

LECOMT rolled out most of their new residencies in 2012 and 2013 (likely in preparation for the Seton Hill charter class graduation in 2013), so I'm guessing we might see more residencies from OMNEE/VCOM in 2017, 2018, and 2019.

 

[SnowDoggy44]

For those of you who got the email from ACOFP about the student petition, do you plan on signing it? http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/somatic-dysfunction

I think we all would like more information about the MOU details, its projected impact, and the issues mentioned in the petition addressed thoroughly and positively, but I also don't want the unification delayed any.

 

[NurWollen]

For those of you who got the email from ACOFP about the student petition, do you plan on signing it? http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/somatic-dysfunction

I think we all would like more information about the MOU details, its projected impact, and the issues mentioned in the petition addressed thoroughly and positively, but I also don't want the unification delayed any.

Not in a million years.

Edit: though in exchange for a full tuition waver, I might consider it.

 

[meliora27]

An interesting article on "DO Distinctiveness" that we hear so much about

http://www.jaoa.org/content/110/5/299.full

 

[GUH]

For those of you who got the email from ACOFP about the student petition, do you plan on signing it? http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/somatic-dysfunction

I think we all would like more information about the MOU details, its projected impact, and the issues mentioned in the petition addressed thoroughly and positively, but I also don't want the unification delayed any.

I sympathize with the petition but signing it seems to be a very easy way to open yourself up to retaliation by the AOA/ACGME... Or is my tin foil hat too thick right now?

 

[SnowDoggy44]

I sympathize with the petition but signing it seems to be a very easy way to open yourself up to retaliation by the AOA/ACGME... Or is my tin foil hat too thick right now?

Technically the petition would only go to SOMA from what was explained in the description.

I like that SOMA has endorsed the merger because I want it to happen, but I also want them to continue doing analysis of impact and creating more transparency of what our AOA leaders are working on and issues they are actively addressing.

 

[GlowInTheDark]

This gem just came to me from the SAACOFP as part of a petition to delay the merger.

"...It is time for all of us in the Osteopathic profession to take a step back and remember what it is we stand for. Perhaps our own tenets should guide us:

1. The [Osteopathic profession] is a unit; the [profession] is a unit of body, mind, and spirit.
2. The [Osteopathic profession] is capable of self-regulation, self-healing, and health maintenance.
3. Structure and function are reciprocally interrelated.
4. Rational treatment is based upon an understanding of the basic principles of [Osteopathic] unity, self-regulation, and the interrelationship of structure and function."

 

[jakeislove]

I sympathize with the petition but signing it seems to be a very easy way to open yourself up to retaliation by the AOA/ACGME... Or is my tin foil hat too thick right now?

They already know you looked at it.

 

[NurWollen]

This gem just came to me from the SAACOFP as part of a petition to delay the merger.

"...It is time for all of us in the Osteopathic profession to take a step back and remember what it is we stand for. Perhaps our own tenets should guide us:

1. The [Osteopathic profession] is a unit; the [profession] is a unit of body, mind, and spirit.
2. The [Osteopathic profession] is capable of self-regulation, self-healing, and health maintenance.
3. Structure and function are reciprocally interrelated.
4. Rational treatment is based upon an understanding of the basic principles of [Osteopathic] unity, self-regulation, and the interrelationship of structure and function."

lol.

 

[NeuroLAX]

Support Grows for Single GME

Dear Colleagues:

With three weeks to go before the House of Delegates, anticipation is building. We are both looking forward to being with AOA delegates and guests to engage in a meaningful dialogue about the future of the osteopathic medical profession.

We continue to make significant progress toward building the single GME accreditation system, including development of processes for educating institutions and programs, making appointments to committees and developing standards. We also continue to have productive discussions with leaders across the country to address their issues and concerns.

Earlier this month, Dr. Juhasz, along with Kenneth Veit, DO, Chair of the AACOM Board of Deans and Dean of PCOM, had the opportunity to represent the osteopathic medical profession at the ACGME’s Board of Directors meeting. They led an education session about the profession, focusing on who we are, how we teach and practice, and the difference we make to those we have the privilege to serve.

We received many collegial comments about the presentation, and it was clear that our ACGME colleagues were eager to learn about the unique aspects of osteopathic education, training and practice, and to build a strong partnership. ACGME CEO Thomas Nasca, MD, offered his assessment of the day:

The ACGME Board was very pleased with Bob and Ken's enthusiastic participation at our recent meeting. All of us appreciated the dialogue and learning, and the opportunity to build relationships and make connections. Our board members are fully engaged, supportive, and excited to move forward on this ground-breaking endeavor.

Also at the meeting, the ACGME board started the formal process to engage the AOA and AACOM as member organizations. Ratification of our first two ACGME Board representatives is expected to occur at their September board meeting.

As mentioned in last week’s AOA Family Connections, a timeline has been developed to keep you informed on when to expect processes and standards to be implemented. Several activities are underway, including the ACGME's efforts to recruit an AOA board-certified DO to serve as a Senior Vice President to oversee osteopathic medicine integration and operations. Details are posted online.

Dr. Vinn has authored two new documents that address the risks of the status quo and general questions and concerns that we have been hearing from our members over the past few months. We hope these tools offer additional insight and context into the importance of a single GME accreditation system.


Delegates who wish to learn more about the single GME accreditation system are invited to a workshop at the House of Delegates meeting on Thursday, July 17, from 2:30 to 4 p.m. in International Ballroom. Attendees will have an opportunity to review the MOU and ask questions. The session will continue beyond the scheduled 90 minutes, if necessary.

Thank you, again, for your leadership and engagement on this issue. Your participation is, and will continue to be, vital in the months and years ahead.

Norman E. Vinn, DO AOA President Robert S. Juhasz, DOAOA President-elect

 

[DocVapor]

Support Grows for Single GME

Beat me to it. Sounds like things are progressing nicely.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

From the letter:

Due to the absorption of nearly 6,300 ACGME slots by foreign and international medical graduates, there has been talk of a two-tiered, voucher-style match, with U.S. graduates getting first choice and the FMG/IMG group getting whatever is left over. Better that that first pool is US MD and DO graduates, not just US MD graduates.

As David Forstein, DO, said at the American College of Osteopathic Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOOG), "if you are not at the table, you are on the menu."

We better go through with this merger.

 

[Dr. Zombie]

I hope this means we are no longer gonna be designated as "Independent applicants" when applying to residencies.

 

[GUH]

The Questions and Concerns page does not really present any new information to address the concerns listed.
"We also need to give the ACGME some time to get to know us better and realize both where we are different, and where we arenot different.We need to give them time to understand what our boards mean and what our skills are. Then we can use theirexisting processes to initiate changes in their standards to codify our role and parity in the system."
How much time do they need? They've already had 140 years.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

The Questions and Concerns page does not really present any new information to address the concerns listed.
"We also need to give the ACGME some time to get to know us better and realize both where we are different, and where we arenot different.We need to give them time to understand what our boards mean and what our skills are. Then we can use theirexisting processes to initiate changes in their standards to codify our role and parity in the system."
How much time do they need? They've already had 140 years.

Because every MD has been alive for 140 years and they have all been closely following Osteopathic curriculum and history. We have a genius here, folks.

 

[DocVapor]

Because every MD has been alive for 140 years and they have all been closely following Osteopathic curriculum and history. We have a genius here, folks.

Every other post of yours that I see is unnecessarily abrasive. Can you calm it down?

 

[user3]

From the letter:

We better go through with this merger.

I believe this is already done in Canada as is. Even with DO bias, having only US MD/DO match before FMG's would help us tremendously.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Because every MD has been alive for 140 years and they have all been closely following Osteopathic curriculum and history. We have a genius here, folks.

Again, please stick to the pre-med forums. You have NOTHING to add to these conversations.

 

[NurWollen]

Again, please stick to the pre-med forums. You have NOTHING to add to these conversations.

Take it easy.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Every other post of yours that I see is unnecessarily abrasive. Can you calm it down?

I must admit my distaste of GUH is getting the best of me.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

In any case
It legitimately blows my mind how far in advance SDN is willing to speculate about the "benefits" of this thing.

How do you go from 'single accrediting body' to 'no DO bias'? That is a completely baseless assumption.

The AOA emails us now with the rhetoric of a bullying victim, and still almost 2 years later we still haven't gotten a clear description as to why.
If we are supporting this thing simply as a workaround to the common program requirement, we are in a really bad place folks. That means that acgme passed legislation in opposition to DOs, forced the AOA to "say uncle" and merge with them to get around it, and for some reason we are just trusting the fact that this will "alleviate the DO bias".

If the ACGME had any respect for DOs, this entire fiasco would have ended with them just re-wording their common program requirement to include osteopathic graduates.

As a sidenote, please dont give me the whole "we will train and match side by side herpdy derpty doo" as a reason that DOs will be treated better.

The better DOs already go ACGME and train side by side with MDs.

 

[NurWollen]

In any case
It legitimately blows my mind how far in advance SDN is willing to speculate about the "benefits" of this thing.

How do you go from 'single accrediting body' to 'no DO bias'? That is a completely baseless assumption.

The AOA emails us now with the rhetoric of a bullying victim, and still almost 2 years later we still haven't gotten a clear description as to why.
If we are supporting this thing simply as a workaround to the common program requirement, we are in a really bad place folks. That means that acgme passed legislation in opposition to DOs, forced the AOA to "say uncle" and merge with them to get around it, and for some reason we are just trusting the fact that this will "alleviate the DO bias".

If the ACGME had any respect for DOs, this entire fiasco would have ended with them just re-wording their common program requirement to include osteopathic graduates.

As a sidenote, please dont give me the whole "we will train and match side by side herpdy derpty doo" as a reason that DOs will be treated better.

The better DOs already go ACGME and train side by side with MDs.

For the umpteenth time, no one is saying that.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

For the umpteenth time, no one is saying that.

There's no point trying to reason with someone that can't write a single sentence without adding at least one fallacy.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Have you been on SDN in the past 2 years? That is one of the only two arguments I have seen supporting the merger

 

[SurgeDO]

In any case
It legitimately blows my mind how far in advance SDN is willing to speculate about the "benefits" of this thing.

How do you go from 'single accrediting body' to 'no DO bias'? That is a completely baseless assumption.

The AOA emails us now with the rhetoric of a bullying victim, and still almost 2 years later we still haven't gotten a clear description as to why.
If we are supporting this thing simply as a workaround to the common program requirement, we are in a really bad place folks. That means that acgme passed legislation in opposition to DOs, forced the AOA to "say uncle" and merge with them to get around it, and for some reason we are just trusting the fact that this will "alleviate the DO bias".

If the ACGME had any respect for DOs, this entire fiasco would have ended with them just re-wording their common program requirement to include osteopathic graduates.

As a sidenote, please dont give me the whole "we will train and match side by side herpdy derpty doo" as a reason that DOs will be treated better.

The better DOs already go ACGME and train side by side with MDs.

it did.

https://www.acgme.org/acgmeweb/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRs_07012016.pdf

page 8 of the PDF
III.A.2.b

i do not know why this is not brought up more on these forums. the ACGME never banned non-ACGME trained DOs from ACGME fellowships.

if you ask me, it was all pretty much an empty threat made by the ACGME to acquire control of more residencies. i am happy it scared enough people into a merger, however.

 

[GlowInTheDark]

Have you been on SDN in the past 2 years? That is one of the only two arguments I have seen supporting the merger

Why do we need two systems anymore?

That has always been my argument.

 

[NurWollen]

Why do we need two systems anymore?

That has always been my argument.

Palabra.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

no...that says that the ACGME has the discretion of allowing some AOA trained DOs. We will never know how far they were going to extend that umbrella, but it for damn sure does not work around the requirement for DOs in general.

and "why do we need two systems?" is a terrible argument for supporting something that could close down a significant number of AOA residencies.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

no...that says that the ACGME has the discretion of allowing some AOA trained DOs. We will never know how far they were going to extend that umbrella, but it for damn sure does not work around the requirement for DOs in general.

and "why do we need two systems?" is a terrible argument for supporting something that could close down a significant number of AOA residencies.

Explain why you believe ACGME would be interested in closing residencies when there's a residency crunch and under this new system DOs have 28% representation on the ACGME board.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

....explain why you have a SDN handle with "DO" in your name when you aren't even in medical school

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

....explain why you have a SDN handle with "DO" in your name when you aren't even in medical school

I am in Medical School.

Why are you dodging the question? You say I'm "just a pre-med" (which I'm not anymore) and I'm asking for your opinion, so what is it?

 

[GUH]

....explain why you have a SDN handle with "DO" in your name when you aren't even in medical school

It looks like you're arguing with someone on my ignore list... I'm guessing albino by this post.
Seeing everyone's responses to the mystery poster makes me quite glad for that feature.

Anyways, Chris, I agree with a lot of what you're saying but going ad hominem isn't helping your argument.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

yea you right.
I gotta start using that ignore button.

 

[meliora27]

In the legislature (government) there really aren't ALL that many surprise decisions when a vote comes to the floor. Sure, stuff happens from time to time, but the overhwhelming majority of the time, it's pretty clear how it's going to turn out. For fans of House of Cards, think of the role of the Whip. The Whip usually has a pretty good idea of how many votes are going to be needed and where those votes will come from.

Sure there can be surprises, but I have a feeling the AOA has done a pretty good job "whipping" the vote, and when it finally comes up on the floor at the HOD, it will likely pass. Just my speculation here...

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

yea you right.
I gotta start using that ignore button.

Yeah, that's what you do when you wildly speculate and then don't have anything to back it up with.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

In the legislature (government) there really aren't ALL that many surprise decisions when a vote comes to the floor. Sure, stuff happens from time to time, but the overhwhelming majority of the time, it's pretty clear how it's going to turn out. For fans of House of Cards, think of the role of the Whip. The Whip usually has a pretty good idea of how many votes are going to be needed and where those votes will come from.

Sure there can be surprises, but I have a feeling the AOA has done a pretty good job "whipping" the vote, and when it finally comes up on the floor at the HOD, it will likely pass. Just my speculation here...

It already did, last year. Its a matter of ironing it along at this point

 

[jakeislove]

Kill it with fire!

 

[IMDoc607]

....explain why you have a SDN handle with "DO" in your name when you aren't even in medical school

Why don't you address the question and stop taking the "you're just a premed line" because he isn't anymore.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Why don't you address the question and stop taking the "you're just a premed line" because he isn't anymore.

Thank you. I just don't find it logical that the ACGME wants to basically buy all these residencies and give more power to DOs only to close residencies. This would have the opposite effect of what they want. They already know those previously AOA residencies will continue prioritizing DOs over MDs, so why create a system where more DOs will be forced to apply and compete in MD residencies? I know the knee jerk reaction is to say that every MD will take priority over every DO, but if we are realistic, DOs are in all levels of management, DOs with 28% representation will have power to retaliate over widespread discrimination, DOs are ACGME PDs in different places and there are many people (MDs and Caribbean MD) that believe in the best candidate over the degree -- especially low-tier MD (e.g. Meharry, Puerto Rico, RFU, etc.) vs top DO (e.g. OSUCOM, MSUCOM, PCOM, etc.). I'm also not saying there won't be a single DO residency lost, but the doom and gloom scenario is ridiculous.

 

[IMDoc607]

Thank you. I just don't find it logical that the ACGME wants to basically buy all these residencies and give more power to DOs only to close residencies. This would have the opposite effect of what they want. They already know those previously AOA residencies will continue prioritizing DOs over MDs, so why create a system where more DOs will be forced to apply and compete in MD residencies? I know the knee jerk reaction is to say that every MD will take priority over every DO, but if we are realistic, DOs are in all levels of management, DOs with 28% representation will have power to retaliate over widespread discrimination, DOs are ACGME PDs in different places and there are many people (MDs and Caribbean MD) that believe in the best candidate over the degree -- especially low-tier MD (e.g. Meharry, Puerto Rico, RFU, etc.) vs top DO (e.g. OSUCOM, MSUCOM, PCOM, etc.). I'm also not saying there won't be a single DO residency lost, but the doom and gloom scenario is ridiculous.

Lets be realistic here. I think that overall this is a good thing. A merger should happen. However, to say it will not cause the loss of some fellowships/residencies is wrong. For example, the competitive specialties (derm, ortho, cardio, GI, urology, etc) will all lose some spots to MD's. However, I do not see the AOA being that stupid. While this is all speculation I think that the ACGME and AOA came to a agreement regarding quotas. Will MGH ever accept a DO for IM or cardiology? Unlikely....but will old ACGME programs now totally shun DO's? No I do not think so. I think that they will be forced by the law the show some sort of DO representation in their program. Again....all speculation.

Extremes are never good.....to say this will open up MGH is wrong but to say it will close DO's out of programs is also wrong on the opposite side of the spectrum.

Guys...work hard and do what you need to do.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Lets be realistic here. I think that overall this is a good thing. A merger should happen. However, to say it will not cause the loss of some fellowships/residencies is wrong. For example, the competitive specialties (derm, ortho, cardio, GI, urology, etc) will all lose some spots to MD's. However, I do not see the AOA being that stupid. While this is all speculation I think that the ACGME and AOA came to a agreement regarding quotas. Will MGH ever accept a DO for IM or cardiology? Unlikely....but will old ACGME programs now totally shun DO's? No I do not think so. I think that they will be forced by the law the show some sort of DO representation in their program. Again....all speculation.

Extremes are never good.....to say this will open up MGH is wrong but to say it will close DO's out of programs is also wrong on the opposite side of the spectrum.

Guys...work hard and do what you need to do.

The point of discussion is not about MDs going to DO residencies or vice-versa but that entire residencies and fellowships will be closed down. I think some weak residencies and fellowships will close down, but it doesn't make sense to close down large numbers of them. It is much easier to work with something that exists than create something new, so I believe it is more likely for ACGME to pump in money to those residencies than close them down.

 

[IMDoc607]

The point of discussion is not about MDs going to DO residencies or vice-versa but that entire residencies and fellowships will be closed down. I think some weak residencies and fellowships will close down, but it doesn't make sense to close down large numbers of them. It is much easier to work with something that exists than create something new, so I believe it is more likely for ACGME to pump in money to those residencies than close them down.

I agree.....I think they will do whats necessary to keep them open.

 

[MeatAndCheese]

Thank you. I just don't find it logical that the ACGME wants to basically buy all these residencies and give more power to DOs only to close residencies. This would have the opposite effect of what they want. They already know those previously AOA residencies will continue prioritizing DOs over MDs, so why create a system where more DOs will be forced to apply and compete in MD residencies? I know the knee jerk reaction is to say that every MD will take priority over every DO, but if we are realistic, DOs are in all levels of management, DOs with 28% representation will have power to retaliate over widespread discrimination, DOs are ACGME PDs in different places and there are many people (MDs and Caribbean MD) that believe in the best candidate over the degree -- especially low-tier MD (e.g. Meharry, Puerto Rico, RFU, etc.) vs top DO (e.g. OSUCOM, MSUCOM, PCOM, etc.). I'm also not saying there won't be a single DO residency lost, but the doom and gloom scenario is ridiculous.

Even if a candidate is from a "low-tier MD" school, the MD degree will still open more doors than a degree from a top-DO school will. Seriously, don't kid yourself

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Even if a candidate is from a "low-tier MD" school, the MD degree will still open more doors than a degree from a top-DO school will. Seriously, don't kid yourself

You're missing the point. I don't disagree that it generally will, but you can't condense it down to every single scenario being that MD will beat out a DO applicant. Why do you think 3-5% of MD don't match every year and there are still DO and Caribbeans that do match? Do you think there really has never been a time when they have ranked a DO higher than an MD applicant? Why have a few DO matched into ACGME ROAD and some MD haven't?

 

[meliora27]

Even if a candidate is from a "low-tier MD" school, the MD degree will still open more doors than a degree from a top-DO school will. Seriously, don't kid yourself

^ This x 1000.

I didn't want to believe all the hype about DO discrimination, but as an M4, I'm seeing it more and more. Good grades, very strong USMLE scores, still can't negate those two letters D.O. at some programs. I think this should be priority number one for the AOA leadership.