What is Allopathic Medicine?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
bth7

bth7

It's worth it in the end . . .
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2004
Messages
1,119
Reaction score
2
Members don't see this ad.
I thought those of you applying to med school would find this quote interesting. From the President of the Association of American Medical Colleges:

After more than a century of often bitterly contentious relationships between the osteopathic and allopathic medical professions, we now find ourselves living at a time when osteopathic and allopathic graduates are both sought after by many of the same residency programs; are in most instances both licensed by the same licensing boards; are both privileged by many of the same hospitals; and are found in appreciable numbers on the faculties of each other's medical schools.
Jordan J. Cohen, M.D.; AAMC President
Click to expand...

This is from the man who is the head of all allopathic medical schools in the United States.

Other interesting statements about allopathic medicine: http://www.amsa.org/about/ppp/osteo.cfm

Maybe the distinction between allopathic and osteopathic is coming to an end??
 
bth7 said:
Maybe the distinction between allopathic and osteopathic is coming to an end??
Click to expand...

But wouldn't that put a damper on the whole "we treat the person not the disease" schtick?
 
Gut Shot said:
But wouldn't that put a damper on the whole "we treat the person not the disease" schtick?
Click to expand...

No. But slowly it is being acknowledged that treating the "person not the disease" isn't Osteopathic medicine . . . its just good medicine.
 
Gut Shot said:
Oh, I must disagree. I think it would put quite a damper on it, indeed.
Click to expand...

You disagree with "treating the whole person" is good medicine or you disagree that losing the distinction would put a damper on Osteopathic medicine's claim to this practice? If so, why? Curious.

Just confused. Sorry. 🙂
 
Just a reminder, people. Let's keep the discussion civil.

That said, I have come to realize that both allopathic and osteopathic medical schools really have trended towards the same curricular aspects (with the exception of OMM) including a more patient centered approach to medicine. Why? As stated above, because it is good medicine and both philosophies adapt their methods to provide what they believe is the best care for their patients.

As the comments introduced in the OP illustrate, the preceived difference between the two philosophies is largely a pre-med issue.
 
Depakote said:
Just a reminder, people. Let's keep the discussion civil.

That said, I have come to realize that both allopathic and osteopathic medical schools really have trended towards the same curricular aspects (with the exception of OMM)
Click to expand...

Whose not being civil? If I sounded that way . . . I certainly didn't mean to do so. 🙂

Also, Harvard offered a course in OMM to its medical students last year. And John Hopkins offers on as a summer elective. Those are both allopathic schools. So that's changed too.
 
I don't believe that Depakote is referring to anyone in particular, just that these types of threads typically degenerate into DO vs MD threads which end up being closed anyway. So for sake of keeping threads alive, it's just a friendly reminder.
 
Depakote said:
As the comments introduced in the OP illustrate, the preceived difference between the two philosophies is largely a pre-med issue.
Click to expand...

It's actually more of a general population issue.
 
MirrorTodd said:
I doubt it. It's human nature to bicker about who is better or who has done more.
Click to expand...

It's not about human nature, it's about business. As more osteo grads are seeking allo residencies the osteo philosophy and distinction is eroding. However the competition between organizations which compete for the same resources (students, residency slots, business) is unlikely to disappear without a merger of the groups (the smaller into the larger). And the folks running the osteo organizations and hospitals are unlikely to merge away their jobs and power bases any time soon.
 
Law2Doc said:
It's not about human nature, it's about business. As more osteo grads are seeking allo residencies the osteo philosophy and distinction is eroding. However the competition between organizations which compete for the same resources (students, residency slots, business) is unlikely to disappear without a merger of the groups (the smaller into the larger). And the folks running the osteo organizations and hospitals are unlikely to merge away their jobs and power bases any time soon.
Click to expand...

I agree that economics is major factor. However, I think in the past few years, we've begun to approach a tipping point. There's an increasing number of people within the Osteopathic community who are frustrated with certain aspects of how the AOA runs the show. Likewise on the allopathic side, there's an increasing acknowledgment that Osteopathic students can fill non-primary care residencies with the same competence as allopathic grads. On top of these changing attitudes, the looming reality of a major US physician shortage in the next 10 years will mandate accepting more osteopathic grads.

Looking at these factors, I see a moment coming soon - a major shift. I don't think there will be complete merger of the allopathic and osteopathic worlds, but I do see an increasing relaxation of the last remaining boundaries between them. An indicator of such a change is the recent relaxation by the AOA of their policy on giving DOs AOA-approval of almost any allopathic residency program. In the past, they were adamant about DOs only getting AOA credit if they trained in a formally AOA-approved program. These days, dual-accredited programs (AOA & ACGME) are everywhere, and on the rise every year.

The older generation of docs (both allo and osteo) still has some major hang-ups. But the younger generation of DOs doesn't bare the same resentments towards the allopathic world, they just want to be members of the name team - side-by-side with MDs, sometimes offering a unique perspective perhaps, but not fanning the flames of some outdated turf war.

Exactly how DOs will retain their "uniqueness" in attitude, philosophy and training is a question that remains to be answered. But it will be interesting to watch.

bh
 
bth7 said:
Looking at these factors, I see a moment coming soon - a major shift. I don't think there will be complete merger of the allopathic and osteopathic worlds, but I do see an increasing relaxation of the last remaining boundaries between the two worlds. An indicator of such a change is recent relaxation by the AOA of their policy on giving DOs AOA-approval of almost any allopathic residency program. In the past, they were adamant about DOs only getting AOA credit if they trained in a formally AOA-approved program. These days, dual-accredited programs (AOA & ACGME) are everywhere, and on the rise every year.

The older generation of docs (both allo and osteo) still has some major hang-ups. But the younger generation of DOs doesn't bare the same resentments towards the allopathic world, they just want to be members of the name team - side-by-side with MDs, sometimes offering a unique perspective perhaps, but not fanning the flames of some outdated turf war.

Exactly how DOs will retain their "uniqueness" in attitude, philosophy and training is a question that remains to be answered. But it will be interesting to watch.

bh
Click to expand...

Although I respect your opinion, I kind of doubt that your major shift will occur without a merger. As long as osteo keeps it's own osteo-only residencies, there is a forced distinction -- no loss of the boundaries. The two fields can never reach an equilibrium. DO grads can take the USMLE and seek allo slots but not vice versa -- so as more and more DO students move into the allo world and not vice versa, this actually creates a contention point, not an erosion of one. As much as many would like it to be one happy family working side by side, there are impediments to that beyond just the hang ups of the older generation, and these impediments exist on both sides of the table.

And as I said above the issues are largely stemmed in economics -- there are finite resources -- med students, residency slots, business that each of these two "branches" of medicine are ultimately competing for, not on a day to day working side by side basis, but on a macroeconomic basis. I thus don't think the "turf war" is outdated -- it continues even as philosophies and attitudes change; the underlying business issues remain as long as there are two players with different "team names" on their jerseys (white coats).

As it stands now, allo is increasing its med school numbers in anticipation of the looming physician shortage (not relying on DO to make up the difference) but possibly not a corresponding number of residency slots. It will be curious to see how this pans out.
 
Some interesting data:

Number of Osteopathic graduates in Allopathic (ACGME) residencies, by year.
DO_residents_in_ACGME_total.jpg


Number of Osteopathic graduates in Allopathic (ACGME) residencies, for selected specialties, by year.
DOs_in_ACGME_residencies.jpg



Sources (two JAMA articles):
Sarah E. Brotherton, PhD; Paul H. Rockey, MD, MPH; Sylvia I. Etzel. US Graduate Medical Education, 2004-2005 Trends in Primary Care Specialties. JAMA. 2005;294:1075-1082.

Sarah E. Brotherton, PhD; Paul H. Rockey, MD, MPH; Sylvia I. Etzel. US Graduate Medical Education, 2002-2003 JAMA. 2003;290:1197-1202. PMID:12953003
 
I agree with Law2doc.

The war is not solely the problem of the allopathic side. This distinction is largely due to the DO people too. They are the ones who wish to be separated. Firstly, MD schools don't believe in OMM and even if they are adding it, it is only as an elective whereas true hardcore DOs believe that they have to include it as a requirement.

Secondly, many DOs refuse to merge with the AMA because of several political reasons.

Lastly, DOs don't let MD people into their residency programs, onlythe other way around so that point of separation will remain.

In all, DOs and MDs both may practice medicine and most may never use OMM but until that issue of OMM, DO only residencies, and other such factors are resolved, they will always remain as a separate entity.
 
Do REAL people actually care about the difference between a MD and a DO? Like so many people, I didn't know what a DO was before applying to med school this year!
 
TheRealMD said:
Do REAL people actually care about the difference between a MD and a DO? Like so many people, I didn't know what a DO was before applying to med school this year!
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I find so odd. No one knows that in terms of practice rights, MD=DO. As this data shows, in terms of many specialty choices, increasingly MD=DO.

So why does no one know about this? I just find it very strange. My sense is that no one knows what a DO is before applying to med school. Yet, 15% of US educated physicians are DO's, and that number is going up.

Plus, there's so much misinformation that gets tossed around. Its interesting. And almost anyone you ask has a very strong, emotional opinion about it. What is that about?

bh
 
bth7 said:
Yet, 15% of US educated physicians are DO's, and that number is going up.
Click to expand...

15% of the folks currently graduating from med school each year are DOs. But MD historically have been around much longer than DO, and a lot more of the DO schools are relatively new, so most of the older doctors out there are MD. Thus it's actually much less than 15% of US educated practicing physicians out there that are DO. A google search found numerous sites suggesting DO represents only about 5% of practicing physicians. (See eg. http://www.healthcare-trainingcenter.com/jobs-osteopathy.asp )
So it's really not that surprising that many folks never heard of osteopathy.
 
TheRealMD said:
Do REAL people actually care about the difference between a MD and a DO? Like so many people, I didn't know what a DO was before applying to med school this year!
Click to expand...

Another interesting set of data, published in the same JAMA paper as cited above.

Total DOs in allopathic (ACGME) programs as percentage of US-educated, MD residents (non-International).

DO_ACMGE_residents_as_percentage_of_USMD_residents.jpg


Almost 10% of all US residents training in allopathic programs are DOs!

Source:JAMA. 2005 Sep 7;294(9):1075-82. PMID: 16145028
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...medicine_in_the_United_States#Signs_of_change
 
bth7 said:
That's exactly what I find so odd. No one knows that in terms of practice rights, MD=DO. As this data shows, in terms of many specialty choices, increasingly MD=DO.

So why does no one know about this? I just find it very strange. My sense is that no one knows what a DO is before applying to med school. Yet, 15% of US educated physicians are DO's, and that number is going up.

Plus, there's so much misinformation that gets tossed around. Its interesting. And almost anyone you ask has a very strong, emotional opinion about it. What is that about?

bh
Click to expand...
It doesn't help that at some hospitals, they don't even make an effort to differentiate between a MD and a DO on the ID card...I know this seems really trivial, but wouldn't the DO people want to have "DO" on their ID badges instead of everybody being a MD? I think this is why a lot of people don't know about DO's until they apply (myself included)
 
bth7 said:
Another interesting set of data, published in the same JAMA paper as cited above.

Total DOs in allopathic residents in allopathic (ACGME) programs as percentage of US-educated MD residents (non-International).

DO_ACMGE_residents_as_percentage_of_USMD_residents.jpg


Almost 10% of all US residents training in allopathic programs are DOs!

Source:JAMA. 2005 Sep 7;294(9):1075-82. PMID: 16145028
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...medicine_in_the_United_States#Signs_of_change
Click to expand...

But you have to remember that not all residency slots are filled by US MD or even DO graduates, so if a DO were to take a "competitive" MD slot, the MD that was going to get it is still left with only allo residencies to choose from.
 
TheRealMD said:
But you have to remember that not all residency slots are filled by US MD or even DO graduates, so if a DO were to take a "competitive" MD slot, the MD that was going to get it is still left with only allo residencies to choose from.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is true. But you also have to remember that a good portion on DO don't even apply to ACGME residencies. They do the Osteopathic match.

Not everyone wants a "competitive" spot. Some people actually just want to be doctors, and more DOs are Type B, more MDs are Type A (competitive.) There have been some interesting studies on this.

My point is that DOs do match into competitive specialties, at a rate that increases every year. Whereas in the past, they did not.

Also important to remember is that 30% of ALL US residencies go to people who went to school outside the US. That's HUGE percentage.

The top ten percent is just that. A small minority of programs. 90% of us will not be matching into these programs, and probably don't want to.

Food for thought.
 
bth7 said:
I thought those of you applying to med school would find this quote interesting. From the President of the Association of American Medical Colleges:



This is from the man who is the head of all allopathic medical schools in the United States.

Other interesting statements about allopathic medicine: http://www.amsa.org/about/ppp/osteo.cfm

Maybe the distinction between allopathic and osteopathic is coming to an end??
Click to expand...

You were doing so well on the pre-osteopathic threads. Why come here? Do you think you will convince us all of the supremecy of osteopathic medicine? It wont happen, so give it up. Crusading on sdn, hoping to change a few peoples minds is foolish and will accomplish nothing but make you feel good about yourself. It seems odd that you spend most of your time bashing allopathic schools, when it could be spent more wisely improving your MCAT score in order to gain admission at an allopathic institution.
 
bth7 said:
I thought those of you applying to med school would find this quote interesting. From the President of the Association of American Medical Colleges:



This is from the man who is the head of all allopathic medical schools in the United States.

Other interesting statements about allopathic medicine: http://www.amsa.org/about/ppp/osteo.cfm

Maybe the distinction between allopathic and osteopathic is coming to an end??
Click to expand...

As an aside, if anyone wants to see something interesting, take a look at he/r historical posts. BTH applied to allopathic schools, including MSSM and NYU, and did not gain acceptance. After this, bitterness ensued, and the entire allopathic world became the enemy.
 
abeytt03 said:
As an aside, if anyone wants to see something interesting, take a look at he/r historical posts. BTH applied to allopathic schools, including MSSM and NYU, and did not gain acceptance. After this, bitterness ensued, and the entire allopathic world became the enemy.
Click to expand...

What bitterness? 😕😕
 
abeytt03 said:
You were doing so well on the pre-osteopathic threads. Why come here? Do you think you will convince us all of the supremecy of osteopathic medicine? It wont happen, so give it up. Crusading on sdn, hoping to change a few peoples minds is foolish and will accomplish nothing but make you feel good about yourself. It seems odd that you spend most of your time bashing allopathic schools, when it could be spent more wisely improving your MCAT score in order to gain admission at an allopathic institution.
Click to expand...

The purpose of this thread is not to bash allopathic medicine. Don't take things out of context. If you have problem with someone, ignore that user. You can also use PM.
 
cyclohexanol said:
What bitterness? 😕😕
Click to expand...

Best not to go down this road -- Let's keep this thread from deteriorating into an MD vs DO dispute.

While I don't deny that there are more DOs going into allo residencies each year, and perhaps an increasing number getting into certain competitive residencies, I think you may see a bit of a change now that the number of allo students have been nationally increased (this higher number will be applying for residencies in about three years), assuming they retain the current number of competitive residencies. There will definitely be a crunch. Offshore grads may be the hardest hit, but I wouldn't be surprised if DOs feel a pushdown from the competitive slots -- not because they are any less qualified than in past years, but because there will suddenly be more allo students to compete with for the same number of slots, and allo students were preferentially getting most of the competitive slots previously. Lots of allo students will feel a hit as well -- and will be forced down into primary care slots that were previously less sought after. It will be curious to see.
 
abeytt03 said:
You were doing so well on the pre-osteopathic threads. Why come here? Do you think you will convince us all of the supremecy of osteopathic medicine? It wont happen, so give it up. Crusading on sdn, hoping to change a few peoples minds is foolish and will accomplish nothing but make you feel good about yourself. It seems odd that you spend most of your time bashing allopathic schools, when it could be spent more wisely improving your MCAT score in order to gain admission at an allopathic institution.
Click to expand...

I would never, ever bash any allopathic school. Period. They are good schools that produce caring, compassionate doctors. YOU are the one who has posted all over SDN bashing osteopathic schools. Get it straight man.

For the record, yes I did apply and get rejected from some allopathic schools. But you may notice that I only applied to the top schools in New York City, and in San Francisco. I really wanted to go the school in SF for personal reasons. So my choices were UCSF and Stanford (both extraordinary competitive schools) and Touro-CA.

I was a little uncertain about Touro, mostly because of all the ridiculous things that getting written about osteopathic schools by people on SDN. It's all misinformation from people who don't know what they are talking about and go around perpetuating misinformation their parents told them. They don't understand that the situation with allo/osteo has changed tremendously in past 20, or even 10 years.

I'm not on a mission, but I do want to let people know that even intelligent, Ivy league (Columbia) educated people go to Osteopathic schools. I do. And you know what . . . I don't regret it. I'm a third year now, rotating at several large teaching hospital in New York City, side by side with MD colleagues from the same schools I got rejected from. i take the USMLE Steps exams (and COMLEX) just like my MD counterparts. And I did very well on it.

If I had applied to more MD schools, I's probably be attending one now. I got a 38 on my MCAT. But I wanted to live in San Francisco. I'd already gone to an "A" list school as an undergrad. I did my own research and found out that I could do just as well in the medical world as a DO. I found out that what all this DO-bashing was really about - nothing. So by attending Touro, I saved myself some suffering, and got to live where I wanted (SF) for two years.

I love the little bit of additional training I got in OMM, and I'm happy to have had the slightly different emphasis on holistic medicine modalities in my med school training. But mostly, I happy to be in medical school, because I really love working with patients, and I love practicing the art of helping people.

My point is that Osteopathic and allopathic schools are great. I do want to let others know about this as they face the difficult, daunting task of applying to med school.

Some people have a problem with that. Some people have this tremendous need to bash osteopathic schools, even in the face of very good evidence that they are wrong.

I hope I made it very clear that I have never bashed any allopathic school. And never would. That's just silly, petty, and immature. Every med school in the US is a quality school.

I wish others on SDN had similar values.

Bryan Hopping
Touro University, MS III
 
bth7 said:
I would never, ever bash any allopathic school. Period. They are good schools that produce caring, compassionate doctors. YOU are the one who has posted all over SDN bashing osteopathic schools. Get it straight man.
Click to expand...
'Sup? I have a question about osteos, and I'm too lazy to go look for the answer. What exactly, in your opinion, is the "person vs disease" philosophy in osteo? Thanks😀
 
mirakate said:
'Sup? I have a question about osteos, and I'm too lazy to go look for the answer. What exactly, in your opinion, is the "person vs disease" philosophy in osteo? Thanks😀
Click to expand...

Well, there's nothing about it that's particular to "Osteopathic medicine." Its just good medical practice, a tenet regarding quality patient care. "Treat the whole patient, not the disease" means that you look at the whole patient when making your assessment and treatment plan. You do a complete H&P on a patient when they are admitted to a hospital. You go through all the organ systems in your Review of Systems, not just the one associated with their symptoms. You take thorough and careful social, family and personal history, every time. You listen to the patient, and give them the opportunity and time to communicate all the subjective information about their condition, even the stuff they might be reluctant to tell you. You are willing to discuss their emotional, mental and spiritual history. And you are ready to consider all this in your approach to the patient as a physician. You aknowledge that all these components contribute to wellness.

Obviously, this is what anyone at an allopathic or osteopathic school would learn - the ideal patient interaction. The one you could use in a universe where time and money don't matter, and medicine is not a business. It's an ideal, one we try to live up to, even though we know we will often fall short.

You hear this line in relation to Osteopathic medicine all the time "We treat the whole patient, not just the disease." That's just a tag line . . . like a slogan or an advertisement. The allopathic world has them too. Every MD school has their shtick they give you at your interview - "We train compassionate physicians." Every MD organization has some euphemistic by-line, the AMA's is "Helping Doctors Help Patients." These things, including the "Treating the Whole Patient" are slogans written by some public relations firm.

In the case of the osteopathic world, the slogan is attached to a very long, and sometimes bitter history. Osteopathic physicians fought for a long time for their practice rights. And they got them, in all 50 states. There's lingering feelings of old rivalry there, but nowadays, this silly MD v DO nonsense is over. As the quote in the Original Post makes clear, we are on the same team people. Even the president of the AAMC comes right out and says it.

History of allopathic and osteopathic medicine
 
bth7 said:
Well, there's nothing about it that's particular to "Osteopathic medicine." Its just good medical practice, a tenet regarding quality patient care. "Treat the whole patient, not the disease" means that you look at the whole patient when making your assessment and treatment plan. You do a complete H&P on a patient when they are admitted to a hospital. You go through all the organ systems in your Review of Systems, not just the one associated with their symptoms. You take thorough and careful social, family and personal history, every time. You listen to the patient, and give them the opportunity and time to communicate all the subjective information about their condition, even the stuff they might be reluctant to tell you. You are willing to discuss their emotional, mental and spiritual history. And you are ready to consider all this in your approach to the patient as a physician. You aknowledge that all these components contribute to wellness.

Obviously, this is what anyone at an allopathic or osteopathic school would learn - the ideal patient interaction. The one you could use in a universe where time and money don't matter, and medicine is not a business. It's an ideal, one we try to live up to, even though we know we will often fall short.

You hear this line in relation to Osteopathic medicine all the time "We treat the whole patient, not just the disease." That's just a tag line . . . like a slogan or an advertisement. The allopathic world has them too. Every MD school has their shtick they give you at your interview - "We train compassionate physicians." Every MD organization has some euphemistic by-line, the AMA's is "Helping Doctors Help Patients." These things, including the "Treating the Whole Patient" are slogans written by some public relations firm.

In the case of the osteopathic world, the slogan is attached to a very long, and sometimes bitter history. Osteopathic physicians fought for a long time for their practice rights. And they got them, in all 50 states. There's lingering feelings of old rivalry there, but nowadays, this silly MD v DO nonsense is over. As the quote in the Original Post makes clear, we are on the same team people. Even the president of the AAMC comes right out and says it.

History of allopathic and osteopathic medicine
Click to expand...

I thought as much. Politics are so stupid. 🙁
 
bth7 said:
Well, there's nothing about it that's particular to "Osteopathic medicine." Its just good medical practice, a tenet regarding quality patient care. "Treat the whole patient, not the disease" means that you look at the whole patient when making your assessment and treatment plan. You do a complete H&P on a patient when they are admitted to a hospital. You go through all the organ systems in your Review of Systems, not just the one associated with their symptoms. You take thorough and careful social, family and personal history, every time. You listen to the patient, and give them the opportunity and time to communicate all the subjective information about their condition, even the stuff they might be reluctant to tell you. You are willing to discuss their emotional, mental and spiritual history. And you are ready to consider all this in your approach to the patient as a physician. You aknowledge that all these components contribute to wellness.

Obviously, this is what anyone at an allopathic or osteopathic school would learn - the ideal patient interaction. The one you could use in a universe where time and money don't matter, and medicine is not a business. It's an ideal, one we try to live up to, even though we know we will often fall short.

You hear this line in relation to Osteopathic medicine all the time "We treat the whole patient, not just the disease." That's just a tag line . . . like a slogan or an advertisement. The allopathic world has them too. Every MD school has their shtick they give you at your interview - "We train compassionate physicians." Every MD organization has some euphemistic by-line, the AMA's is "Helping Doctors Help Patients." These things, including the "Treating the Whole Patient" are slogans written by some public relations firm.

In the case of the osteopathic world, the slogan is attached to a very long, and sometimes bitter history. Osteopathic physicians fought for a long time for their practice rights. And they got them, in all 50 states. There's lingering feelings of old rivalry there, but nowadays, this silly MD v DO nonsense is over. As the quote in the Original Post makes clear, we are on the same team people. Even the president of the AAMC comes right out and says it.

History of allopathic and osteopathic medicine
Click to expand...

The problem is that those who started Osteopathy (A trained MD) started it to be different because he didn't like the state of allopathic training in those days and wanted to do the whole OMM thing which he felt had something to it.

However, the fact is that most DOs don't even use it so it is useless and should just be offered as an elective for anyone who chooses to learn it.

On a couple of different occasions, the LECOM-Bradenton representative came by to speak to us at USF and I have to say that he really sounded anti MDs and that DOs were the greatest thing ever and OMM was the best invention on the planet. He kept making it sound like most DOs don't use medications but rather use OMM for everything. Sounded like a nut job. However, the reality is that most DOs I know don't do that. They practice in ways similar to allopathic medicine because allopathic methods are what most people want.

In the olden days there was a greater focus on symtom based treatments and many bitter older DOs and DO adcoms like to try to claim that all MD students do is look at a set of symptoms rather then looking at the patient's history and how medications will affect other symptoms, but say they don't do that.

I think its all BS because both DOs and MDs look at everything as you've already pointed out.

However, I think the division between the two is the fault of both organizations not just MDs.
 
BTH7,

Your posts come off as way too defensive like you have something to prove.

I don't know what you were hoping to accomplish.

A lot of the other problems with the whole DO thing is that many people don't want to go into it not because they feel its inferior but for two reasons:

1. They don't give a damn about the whole OMM thing which in my opinion i feel is a waste of time.

2. While they are educated that there is minimal difference there is still a large portion of patients and the general population who are ignorant and don't know what the hell a DO is. This is especially true in many rural places like Pensacola where my friend lives. This ignorance results in patients who refuse to see a doctor if he's a DO. I have an Iranian friend who's father once said he'd never go to a DO and he refuses to get educated about what DO is. Then there are those people who assume a DO is a chiropracter.

What's worse is that there are many allopathic residencies and many international sites that still don't recognize DOs even if there've been great strides and improvement in that area. This limits options for people who may wish to practice in certain areas as well as people who may wish to practice in certain fields of medicine. This is why many people still don't do the DO route.

The divisions and barriers will not be fully broken down until the smaller of the two organizations combines itself with the bigger of the two organizations and that isn't what AT still wanted.
 
That said, I don't think DO is a bad option and I don't bash DOs. I'd certainly go to one but there are a lot of other people who wouldn't or who do think ignorantly and that's why a lot of people are iffy towards the idea of that route.
 
On a couple of different occasions, the LECOM-Bradenton representative came by to speak to us at USF and I have to say that he really sounded anti MDs and that DOs were the greatest thing ever and OMM was the best invention on the planet. He kept making it sound like most DOs don't use medications but rather use OMM for everything. Sounded like a nut job. However, the reality is that most DOs I know don't do that. They practice in ways similar to allopathic medicine because allopathic methods are what most people want.
Click to expand...

That is, also, unfortunately, the attitude I most often see. 🙁 Not my idea of something I want to be involved in.

I've heard that DO's put more of an emphasis on the way disease affects/appears (?reflects... no idea what word I want) in the muscular/skeletal system as opposed to just where the symptoms actually are. y/n?
 
gujuDoc said:
BTH7,
Your posts come off as way too defensive like you have something to prove.

I don't know what you were hoping to accomplish.

A lot of the other problems with the whole DO thing is that many people don't want to go into it not because they feel its inferior but for two reasons:

1. They don't give a damn about the whole OMM thing which in my opinion i feel is a waste of time.

2. While they are educated that there is minimal difference there is still a large portion of patients and the general population who are ignorant and don't know what the hell a DO is.
Click to expand...

BINGO!!!

bth, I haven't read any of your other posts, but your inferiority complex is unbelievable.

bth7 said:
I would never, ever bash any allopathic school. Period. They are good schools that produce caring, compassionate doctors. YOU are the one who has posted all over SDN bashing osteopathic schools. Get it straight man.
Click to expand...

:laugh: never, ever? HAHA!! Is this the 2nd grade? Do you pinky swear and cross your heart too?

Read your post again and try to think like one of us trivial beings (non-Ivy leaguer) as you probably refer to us, and see if you don't think you sound a little holier than thou.

We get it, you're proud. Whoopie....Go DO!! :clap:
 
bth7 said:
I would never, ever bash any allopathic school. Period. They are good schools that produce caring, compassionate doctors. YOU are the one who has posted all over SDN bashing osteopathic schools. Get it straight man.

For the record, yes I did apply and get rejected from some allopathic schools. But you may notice that I only applied to the top schools in New York City, and in San Francisco. I really wanted to go the school in SF for personal reasons. So my choices were UCSF and Stanford (both extraordinary competitive schools) and Touro-CA.

I was a little uncertain about Touro, mostly because of all the ridiculous things that getting written about osteopathic schools by people on SDN. It's all misinformation from people who don't know what they are talking about and go around perpetuating misinformation their parents told them. They don't understand that the situation with allo/osteo has changed tremendously in past 20, or even 10 years.

I'm not on a mission, but I do want to let people know that even intelligent, Ivy league (Columbia) educated people go to Osteopathic schools. I do. And you know what . . . I don't regret it. I'm a third year now, rotating at several large teaching hospital in New York City, side by side with MD colleagues from the same schools I got rejected from. i take the USMLE Steps exams (and COMLEX) just like my MD counterparts. And I did very well on it.

If I had applied to more MD schools, I's probably be attending one now. I got a 38 on my MCAT. But I wanted to live in San Francisco. I'd already gone to an "A" list school as an undergrad. I did my own research and found out that I could do just as well in the medical world as a DO. I found out that what all this DO-bashing was really about - nothing. So by attending Touro, I saved myself some suffering, and got to live where I wanted (SF) for two years.

I love the little bit of additional training I got in OMM, and I'm happy to have had the slightly different emphasis on holistic medicine modalities in my med school training. But mostly, I happy to be in medical school, because I really love working with patients, and I love practicing the art of helping people.

My point is that Osteopathic and allopathic schools are great. I do want to let others know about this as they face the difficult, daunting task of applying to med school.

Some people have a problem with that. Some people have this tremendous need to bash osteopathic schools, even in the face of very good evidence that they are wrong.

I hope I made it very clear that I have never bashed any allopathic school. And never would. That's just silly, petty, and immature. Every med school in the US is a quality school.

I wish others on SDN had similar values.

Bryan Hopping
Touro University, MS III
Click to expand...
I got a 38 on my MCAT.
Click to expand...

Anyone else believe this? BTH7 Claims to be a Columbia grad with a 38, and didn't get into any allopathic schools? You must of went into your osteopathic rant during the interview or you are just plain lying. I go with the latter.
 
abeytt03 said:
Anyone else believe this? BTH7 Claims to be a Columbia grad with a 38, and didn't get into any allopathic schools? You must of went into your osteopathic rant during the interview or you are just plain lying. I go with the latter.
Click to expand...

👍
 
abeytt03 said:
Anyone else believe this? BTH7 Claims to be a Columbia grad with a 38, and didn't get into any allopathic schools? You must of went into your osteopathic rant during the interview or you are just plain lying. I go with the latter.
Click to expand...

bth7MCAT.GIF




[email protected]
 
Firstly, it's "must have."

Secondly, maybe he sucked at interviews or ECs or just didn't fit well.

Thirdly, keep it civil. Y'all are smart, you can figure out what it means. Otherwise, there's dictionary.com. Don't be a jacka$$, any of you.

Fourthly, bth7, I mean you, too.
 
bth7 said:
bth7MCAT.GIF




[email protected]
Click to expand...

Dude, if you really are 31, why are you arguing over the internet? What will this accomplish? Why did this thread degenerate into the equivalent of a kindergarten school fight? 🙄

Honestly, I was ready to tell gujuDoc to back off until you pulled that stunt. In reality, I don't think anyone cares you made a 38. I certainly don't. What difference does it make if you had that score if you know that being a DO is what you wanted to do?

It's this kind of stupid fighting that leads to the reason why MDs and DOs have been hating each other for most of the century.
 
TheRealMD said:
Dude, if you really are 31, why are you arguing over the internet? What will this accomplish? Why did this thread degenerate into the equivalent of a kindergarten school fight? 🙄

Honestly, I was ready to tell gujuDoc to back off until you pulled that stunt. In reality, I don't think anyone cares you made a 38. I certainly don't. What difference does it make if you had that score if you know that being a DO is what you wanted to do?

It's this kind of stupid fighting that leads to the reason why MDs and DOs have been hating each other for most of the century.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It is stupid. But the guy called me a liar. And it pisses me off.

I don't give a hoot if I got a 38. And I'm glad you don't either. My point in posting is only that there are people out there who refuse to acknowledge that quality applicants go to DO schools, for many reasons. In my case, I realized that I wanted to go to med school, and that DO schools offered me the same education, the same rotation sites, the same residency options, etc . . . as MD schools.

I look back now at the application process. How "iffy" I felt about going to a DO school. Wondering if it would really be okay. All because of all the put downs and hostility I read on SDN.

Now, 3 years later, I'd like to set the record straight to anyone applying. I think any smart applicant would consider all their options, MD and DO. But its hard to make decisions when people are so hostile about the whole thing, and just keep repeating the same hackneyed misinformation.

The DOs are as much (if not more) to blame for the misinformation out there as MDs. The MDs keep chanting "DO schools aren't as good." And the DOs chant back "But we treat the whole patient." Like rabid fans at a high school football game.

My position, my agenda in posting, is that I think its time for this nonsense to end - on SDN, and elsewhere. I don't know how that's going to happen, but I think it starts with better information. But it doesn't help that DOs are outnumbered 10 to 1.

Can we just work this out? Should we all go to group therapy? We are on the same team. Stop the name calling. Let's move on and be physicians and surgeons.

Finally, look back at these posts. Have I made any contentious statements on this tread? I'm trying to not be the one letting the conversation devolve into petty bickery.

bth7
 
bth7 said:
Agreed. It is stupid. But the guy called me a liar. And it pisses me off.

I don't give a hoot if I got a 38. And I'm glad you don't either. My point in posting is only that there are people out there who refuse to acknowledge that quality applicants go to DO schools, for many reasons. In my case, I realized that I wanted to go to med school, and that DO schools offered me the same education, the same rotation sites, the same residency options, etc . . . as MD schools.

I look back now at the application process. How "iffy" I felt about going to a DO school. Wondering if it would really be okay. All because of all the put downs and hostility I read on SDN.

Now, 3 years later, I'd like to set the record straight to anyone applying. I think any smart applicant would consider all their options, MD and DO. But its hard to make decisions when people are so hostile about the whole thing, and just keep repeating the same hackneyed misinformation.

The DOs are as much (if not more) to blame for the misinformation out there as MDs. The MDs keep chanting "DO schools aren't as good." And the DOs chant back "But we treat the whole patient." Like rabid fans at a high school football game.

My position, my agenda in posting, is that I think its time for this nonsense to end - on SDN, and elsewhere. I don't know how that's going to happen, but I think it starts with better information. But it doesn't help that DOs are outnumbered 10 to 1.

Can we just work this out? Should we all go to group therapy? We are on the same team. Stop the name calling. Let's move on and be physicians and surgeons.

Finally, look back at these posts. Have I made any contentious statements on this tread? I'm trying to not be the one letting the conversation devolve into petty bickery.

bth7
Click to expand...

I agree, and I am glad you have come around. You have been contentious, defensive, and implictly disparaging.

You must accept that applicants generally consider allopathic medicine first because it is more competitive and offers the traditional route towards medicine. You could have obtained your undergraduate degree from anywhere and been a college graduate. You chose Columbia because it is more competitive and offers a more prestigious degree. The same idea applies to the title of M.D.
 
Unfortunately for you this is just not the place to care. Honestly, this is a forum where half the people are ignorant, see specific posters above...and the other half will just say stuff to piss you off or start an argument. In the end nothing you say is going to change that on a forum of premeds. You just need to be happy with your decision to go to the school you attend, and then be the best physician you can be. In the real working world these letters do not matter, what matters is how you do your job and how you work with your peers.
 
abeytt03 said:
I agree, and I am glad you have come around. You have been contentious, defensive, and implictly disparaging.

You must accept that applicants generally consider allopathic medicine first because it is more competitive and offers the traditional route towards medicine. You could have obtained your undergraduate degree from anywhere and been a college graduate. You chose Columbia because it is more competitive and offers a more prestigious degree. The same idea applies to the title of M.D. .
Click to expand...

Lol you amaze me 🙄
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
What is academic medicine, anyway?
Replies
6
Views
2K
sw99
sw99
B
What I would like to contribute to medicine
Replies
2
Views
4K
LizzyM
LizzyM
M
What is the typical application year schedule?
Replies
3
Views
688
LindaAccepted
LindaAccepted
Proconsul1981
What Is a Special Master’s Program?
Replies
4
Views
836
LizzyM
LizzyM
L
what is the best way to gain clinical experience?
Replies
7
Views
1K
thedude6512
T
Top