- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,583
- Reaction score
- 3
Yesterday i read that in Europe, some countries dont have Dental Schools. Dentistry is like a speciality after Med school. Similarly Podiatry is a part of Orthopedic department.
Iam just curious, How did seperate Podiatry Schools evolved? I mean Chiropractic, Naturopathic and even DO schools can be seperate because of they have their own Philosophies and theories and are different from Allopathy.
But isnt Podiatry completely in terms of allopathy. i mean we dont have any kind of different theories or approaches. many pod schools are even integrated in Med schools.Then why is it that we have a seperate school. I mean the idea is awesome.it works for me bcoz in that way i dont have to go thru Gynecology and Psychiatry rotations. bcoz they have nothing to do with Podiatry.Then in that case, later one can expect seperate schools dedicated to Opthamology, or Psyshciatry.
But then if we have a school dedicated to a certain speciality only, just as Dentisry has seperated itself from regualar Med school in most countries and we dont find MD's as such solely dedicated to practicisng Dentistry. The practice of Dentistry is only the business of a DDS. And this limits friction between MDs and DDS over who is more trained or who is more capable in treating dentistry related problems and also cuts the economic competition for DDS as they are the only ones in the business.
Then if they wanted to develop a dedicated Podiatry school only for learning F&A. then why didnt they asked that the entire treatment of F & A be given to Pods rather than having regular MDs (F & A orthos) and DPMs treating the patients with same problems.In that DPMs would be like DDS. only medically trained professionals that can treat F & A. then all this superior/inferior complexes and debates who is better or who is more trained between MDs & DPMs wudnt exist. In this way, both DPMs and MDs will never have any problems just as MDs and DDS dont have any friction over scope of practice issues..
The DPM & Ortho (F &A) case is not like Optho and Optometrists. OD's are dedicated to only primary eye care. So ODs and Opthos are at different levels in terms of training and scope of practice (in most cases) and they dont have that problem as such.
But DPMS and Orthos (F &A) do exactly the same thing and have same legal scope over Foot & ANKLE. Its like two people doing a same task and fighting who is more better when both of them are part & parcel of same Allopathic Medicine. Thats why i asked the question!
Iam just curious, How did seperate Podiatry Schools evolved? I mean Chiropractic, Naturopathic and even DO schools can be seperate because of they have their own Philosophies and theories and are different from Allopathy.
But isnt Podiatry completely in terms of allopathy. i mean we dont have any kind of different theories or approaches. many pod schools are even integrated in Med schools.Then why is it that we have a seperate school. I mean the idea is awesome.it works for me bcoz in that way i dont have to go thru Gynecology and Psychiatry rotations. bcoz they have nothing to do with Podiatry.Then in that case, later one can expect seperate schools dedicated to Opthamology, or Psyshciatry.
But then if we have a school dedicated to a certain speciality only, just as Dentisry has seperated itself from regualar Med school in most countries and we dont find MD's as such solely dedicated to practicisng Dentistry. The practice of Dentistry is only the business of a DDS. And this limits friction between MDs and DDS over who is more trained or who is more capable in treating dentistry related problems and also cuts the economic competition for DDS as they are the only ones in the business.
Then if they wanted to develop a dedicated Podiatry school only for learning F&A. then why didnt they asked that the entire treatment of F & A be given to Pods rather than having regular MDs (F & A orthos) and DPMs treating the patients with same problems.In that DPMs would be like DDS. only medically trained professionals that can treat F & A. then all this superior/inferior complexes and debates who is better or who is more trained between MDs & DPMs wudnt exist. In this way, both DPMs and MDs will never have any problems just as MDs and DDS dont have any friction over scope of practice issues..
The DPM & Ortho (F &A) case is not like Optho and Optometrists. OD's are dedicated to only primary eye care. So ODs and Opthos are at different levels in terms of training and scope of practice (in most cases) and they dont have that problem as such.
But DPMS and Orthos (F &A) do exactly the same thing and have same legal scope over Foot & ANKLE. Its like two people doing a same task and fighting who is more better when both of them are part & parcel of same Allopathic Medicine. Thats why i asked the question!