A strong advice (I never got) from a current DO student

[haujun]

---

Members do not see this ad.

TO PRE-DO Students: I am second year TOP DO student, ranked top 1/5 of class. AND I really question my classmates' motives about attending DO school when I hear negative comments about OMT from them. They hate to learn this, it's too hard, I don't have time to learn this, it's phony etc. Remember you are responsible to know OMT while taking all other medical subjects. This is difficult. AND take all three steps of board exams filled with osteopathic medicine. In fact, step 1 of COMLEX have at least 15-20% OMM questions.
THE Real problem of public ignorace is attributed to DO's lack of using OMT in their medical practice. DON'T blame AOA's lack of interest in advertising! It doesn't take high GPA or MCAT do learn this technique. It takes a hardwork and interest. DOn't become a doctor of osteopathy if you are not ready to make a OMT PART OF YOUR LIFE...
Two years ago despite of acceptances to two MD schools I turned down to attend a DO school that has most students hating OMT.--Unfortunately, This is the case for other DO schools as well. (This is the ONLY time I "think" about having some regrets of not attending MD school.) The irony is that they are actually hating the technique that set apart from other health practioner. I don't see chiropractic students hating their techniques. Thus the title the doctor of osteopathy (called this about few years ago)...NOW it is called the doctor of osteopathic medicine should be given to applicants who can become a DO who can implement OMT/ philosophy from familiy practioner to neurosurgery. The future of osteopathic medicine depend on having the "right kind" of students learning this technique.

Osteopathy: The method of treating disease by manipulating the bones and muscles. Osteopathy also includes other methods of medical treatment, such as the use of drugs and surgery.

 

[modelcitizen]

Thanks for your post, haujun. Congratulations on doing so well at med school.

To be honest, that's one of my biggest fears about going to DO school. I don't really want to waste a bunch of time learning something that I don't really believe in. But I'm hoping that the classes will show me how useful it really is. Are any of your classmates who originally didn't like OMT turning out to like it after they have been exposed to it more in class?

 

[haujun]

The best way to learn OMT is by hands on practice. It is difficult to grasp the OMM concepts by attending the class. The first two years of OMM training will prepare for the third year's OMM rotation. I was told that some students will then appreciate the application of OMT. Mainly, I was particularly concerned with my classmates' lack of interests because they attend the osteopathic medical school.

 

[raspberry swirl]

don't listen to haujun. he doesn't know what he's talking about. apparently he thinks since he is doing better academically than his fellow students, he can make sweeping generalizations about their motives.

what about me haujun? i am thinking about psychiatiry. as a general rule, psychiatrists aren't allowed to touch their patients, and if they feel a patient could benefit from some OMM, they have to call an attending or other DO on staff to perform it. i don't plan on making OMM a part of my life. should i not have attended an osteopathic school?? we are told over and over again here at LECOM that osteopathic medicine is not OMM. osteopathic medicine is a philosophy about practicing better medicine. OMM is simply an adjunct, albeit one that is extremely beneficial for many patients, but not all.

do you think that if a student desires to enter a specialty that has no/limited use for manipulation (i.e. psych, anesthesiology, most surgical specialties, neonatology, pathology, etc. etc. this list continues . . .) then they should not even consider osteopathic schools, even though they will be missing out on the other important facets of an osteopathic education?

your post has no bearing on anything. OMM is a subject just like any other. Not everyone likes biochemistry, not everyone likes derm. not everyone likes OMM. and in my case, i'd probably love it if it was taught in a more organized fashion at LECOM and if the grading procedures were appropriate (which they are not) but frankly i dislike it for those reasons. so i hate OMM, does that make me a bad osteopathic student?? i hate pharm, does that make me a bad medical student?? should i just drop out now and apply to law school??

people should apply to osteopathic schools because they want to be doctors. wanting to incorporate manipulation into their practice would be a fabulous bonus. even if you don't, it gives any student a greater understanding of human anatomy and the connectivity of the body's systems, a helpful thing in and of itself. apparently your studying has gotten you good grades, but it hasn't given you any perspectives.

(everyone else- sorry for the long post 🙄 )

 

[bostongirl22]

sorry haujun, but i have to say, you should really just focus on yourself and not worry about whether or not your classmates are "into" OMT. Quite frankly, I don't like a lot of it and really don't intend on using most of it except perhaps some muscle energy. This is my choice, and had I liked it perhaps I would be planning on using more of it. Just worry about yourselft, not how everyone else plans on practicing.

 

[exmike]

I cant really say anything since i'm purely pre-allo, but I liken OMM to an extended rotation. Just because you have to rotate through a certain number of fields doesnt mean you have to master all of them, or even a majority of them, and you're surely not going to need to know most of them in the future. Its part of the breadth of practice that goes along with becoming a physician. We take what we like, and we cut out what we dont. Is it lame that half of the required rotations for all physicians are in primary care if I have no intention of going into primary care? Of course not.

Another way to look at it is students that dont care to master basic science materials. If you intend to go into family practice, does it make a difference if you're number 1 in your class or a little below average? You'll still end up doing what you want to do. I dont think you should judge your peers motivations simply because they dont share the same enthusiasm with you for OMM.

Finally, I dont really understand what your purported academic excellence at your school has anything to do with people blowing off OMM. Im sure there are students at the bottom of the class that are fervent followers of OMM too.

 

[DrQuinn]

careful what you say of your classmates. I graduated NSUCOM in May "ranked top 1/5 of class." (I won't even mention board scores). And you could likely put me into your targeted category. But that makes me no less of an Osteopathic Physician. I absolutely abhor cervical HVLA... but will do thoracic HVLA and a few muscle energy techniques. But I will likely NEVER do them on a patient (as my specialty is Emergency Medicine). Do not talk about your fellow classmates in a negative way because they do not share your love for OMM/OMT.

Q, DO

 

[Amy B]

Question, how do we perform these techniques cervical HVLA... and thoracic HVLA) in class on our class mates if they have nothing wrong with them? Aren't these things for specific problems? Won't they hurt a perfectly normal classmate?

 

[haujun]

Recently, I was told by a DO physician that Psychiatry is one of the most osteopathic of all medical specialties. I'll find more about
this incoming months.. Quite franky I don't love OMT or do I hate my classmates because I happend to have better grades. Rather I respect the importance of OMM and how this philosphy and tool make osteopathic physicians more complete doctor. I just want pre-DO to aware of OMM and can't just blow off like other medical subjects. This is the subject you'll have to suffer through for three years whereas biochemistry will be over in three weeks. More importantly, this may be most important subject you'll take in the medical school which is why over 15% board questions on OMM (most emphasized). AS DOs we came long way and separate way to make our profession known to public. AOA give us different board exams because we are responsible to know OMM and how it is integrated to the other medical sujects. We are held to equal, but different standards.It is rather most unfortunate sight when there are many empty seats in OMM lecture. It doesn't make sense to be deaf when the comments like "this is so phony" are said in the OMM lab. I believe such tragedies and unhappiness should be avoided by informing premedical students about OMM. Thier happiness may depend on it.

 

[DrQuinn]

Honestly I think for premeds "their happiness" depends on whether they were accepted to ANY medical school, DO or MD. I think you have forgotten what it was like to be a pre-med. How many of us said while we were studying for the MCAT or sending in our applications to medical school that "we woudl do ANYTHING to get into medical school!!!!!!!!!!!"

And its interesting how you say that OMM is so "important," yet you are only a second year DO student. How many boards have you taken? You HIGHLY overestimate the # of OMM questions, believe me.

Q, DO

 

[raining4days]

I guess it depends on the students' specialty interest. I am interested in forensic pathology. So, basically for me:
Anatomy = +
Pathology = +
Patient/Doctor Clinicals = -
Third-year rotations = - <----- "so phony" to me

If I was taking OMM, I couldn't see how that would benefit me. So I basically pay attention to the classes that I like and less to the classes that I don't like. In the end, I would just be taking the things from my school that will benefit me later on in residency.

 

[lealf-ye]

Here is the clue: Most of people want to be a MD rather than a DO with some exceptions. Got it?

If you are not convinced.....🙄 🙄

 

[Goofyone]

Originally posted by haujun
More importantly, this may be most important subject you'll take in the medical school.......

 

[Idiopathic]

Originally posted by lealf-ye
Here is the clue: Most of people want to be a MD rather than a DO with some exceptions.

Wow, I guess all you had to do to find this out was look at the number of apps for each group, eh?🙄

ANY ***** CAN BE A DOCTOR AND ANY ***** CAN BE A GOOD DOCTOR. IT DOESNT MATTER WHERE YOU GO TO SCHOOL OR WHETHER OR NOT YOU PRACTICE OMT. WHY IS THE ATTRITION RATE SO LOW AT MED SCHOOL? BECAUSE THEY DONT WANT TO LOOK FOOLISH. DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE UNDERGRADUATE GPA AND MCAT ARE THE ULTIMATE MEASURE OF HOW GOOD A DOCTOR YOU WILL BE? WELL, IT SURE SEEMS THAT WAY, GOING BY LEALF-YE'S STANDARDS.

Otherwise phrased: If you cant go MD, you will go DO and be miserable (with a few 🙄 exceptions, mind you), because your MCAT scores and GPA are not good enough. But, you will not get kicked out of medical school, regardless of where you go. So you will be fashioned into a physician, and likely a good one.

As for OMT, I liken it to my Psych. rotation....just another tool in the belt. I do have quite a bit of disdain for those who belittle my effort and determination and drive because I dont enjoy OMM (which is taught mercilessly poorly at my school, IMHO). So, to the OP, why dont you try and change things? Find a way to get people interested in OMM, if you are really concerned about the damage to the profession.

 

[lealf-ye]

Originally posted by Idiopathic
Wow, I guess all you had to do to find this out was look at the number of apps for each group, eh?🙄

ANY ***** CAN BE A DOCTOR AND ANY ***** CAN BE A GOOD DOCTOR. IT DOESNT MATTER WHERE YOU GO TO SCHOOL OR WHETHER OR NOT YOU PRACTICE OMT. WHY IS THE ATTRITION RATE SO LOW AT MED SCHOOL? BECAUSE THEY DONT WANT TO LOOK FOOLISH. DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE UNDERGRADUATE GPA AND MCAT ARE THE ULTIMATE MEASURE OF HOW GOOD A DOCTOR YOU WILL BE? WELL, IT SURE SEEMS THAT WAY, GOING BY LEALF-YE'S STANDARDS.

Otherwise phrased: If you cant go MD, you will go DO and be miserable (with a few 🙄 exceptions, mind you), because your MCAT scores and GPA are not good enough. But, you will not get kicked out of medical school, regardless of where you go. So you will be fashioned into a physician, and likely a good one.

As for OMT, I liken it to my Psych. rotation....just another tool in the belt. I do have quite a bit of disdain for those who belittle my effort and determination and drive because I dont enjoy OMM (which is taught mercilessly poorly at my school, IMHO). So, to the OP, why dont you try and change things? Find a way to get people interested in OMM, if you are really concerned about the damage to the profession.

If you are not convinced, ask MDs and DOs you know their preferences. If you are still not convinced, there is not much I or anyone can do. I am not here to argue about this. 😛

 

[deleted6669]

your signature is half right....
you are a pest AND you are always wrong.....

 

[Idiopathic]

Originally posted by lealf-ye
If you are not convinced, ask MDs and DOs you know their preferences. If you are still not convinced, there is not much I or anyone can do. I am not here to argue about this. 😛

I am not sure what there is to be convinced about. You say that most people would rather be MD, and this I dont disagree with, and the difference in application numbers supports this. But to say that most DO's wanted to be MD's is actually not true, and it is this kind of generalization that the OP should be concerned about, not whether his/her colleagues 'enjoy' OMM.

 

[Shinken]

Gentlemen, please be aware that lealf-ye is a troll. Do a search on his posts and you'll see. Do not get sucked into his game and start a flame war.

 

[lealf-ye]

Originally posted by Idiopathic
But to say that most DO's wanted to be MD's is actually not true.

The above could be right, but needs more stats to prove.
I just tell from my perception, but it could be wrong.


Anyway, I am a troll. I am always wrong. 😛 😛 😛
not sure what above commnets contribute to the OP, except this is just some kind of personal insult that encouraged in this forum. By the way, I am always wrong, so don't take it serious. Don't want to inflame anyone.


Maybe what I can do is just ------ Your guys are always right.

Comments from DOs or future DOs for their own professions could be baised. Ok...Whatever..... Your guys are always right.
However, no one can directly prove that the majority of the DOs prefer DO over MD, so maybe I am not always wrong. Tell me otherwise. I will apology for my mistake. Can you prove?

 

[Stranger]

As a patient, I would be as comfortable seeing a DO as I would be seeing an MD, as long as the DO didn't perfom OMM for anything other than lower back pain. According to this website, "Although many osteopaths use manipulation as an adjunct to treat many illnesses, there are no large controlled trials of the effectiveness of manipulation for conditions other than lower back pain." So...why do doctors use this? I expect doctors to treat people using methods that have been determined to be helpful by research. While there may be lots of anecdotal evidence for the usefullness of OMM, there's also anecdotal evidence for accupuncture, prayer, mail-order herbal suppliments, etc. In the past, there must have been tons of anecdotal evidence for putting leeches on people and doing other things that actually turned out to be harmful. If a doctor thinks it's important to use treatments that have no scientific basis, I would assume that they don't understand the importance of the scientific method, and that allowing them to be my doctor would be dangerous to my health.

I know this view is pretty extreme, and I don't mean to step on any toes. I am aware that my knowledge of osteopathy is limited, and I hope that I haven't misrepresented the profession. I also don't really know what the real reprocussions are of having a doctor who doesn't understand the importance of science, or if a dedication to OMM is actually indicitive of a misunderstanding of how to determine what is appropriate in treating a patient. If I do go to medical school, I might choose to go DO if I can't get into an MD school. I don't think that having a slightly lower GPA in college or not being good at standardized tests means that one will inevitably be a poor doctor. I think that good performance in med school and residency, ability to listen to and empathize with patients, and dedication to the profession are what make a good doctor, and those are qualities that a DO can clearly possess. I also think that many of the things that make DO's unique, such as a dedication to preventive health care, are important, and ought to be embraced (if they aren't already) by MDs.

 

[sophiejane]

First of all: please please please don't do a DO degree only if you can't get into an allopathic school. People who do often end up bitter and do not represent the profession very well. Just retake the MCAT and go allopathic--you will be happier in the long run.

Also, before you go making sweeping statements about OMT, a subject you know very little about, I suggest you do some research other than looking at one website.

Finally, part of being in medicine is taking the risk that the treatment you prescribe may not work, and may actually do more harm than good. OF course we try to minimize this, but it's part of the territory. Take Pthalydimide, for example. It was widely prescribed for morning sickness in the 1950s until it was proven to cause horrific birth defects (this drug is now termed a "teratogen" meaning "monster-producing") and yet thousands of doctors (mostly MDs, since there were few DOs in practice at the time) prescribed it to their patients before they knew about the side effects. There are many other drugs and techiques which are no longer used for similar reasons.

OMT, however, has and extremely low occurance of injury or poor side effects, much lower than that of any prescribed or over the counter medication, including aspirin and ibuprofen.

It may not work for everyone, but it works for many, and it is far less dangerous than drugs. That is why DOCTORS prescribe it--if it doesn't work, they can use drugs, or use drugs in combination with OMT. THere are many, many happy and pain-free patients of DOs out there who have been successfully treated with OMT.

 

[Elysium]

Originally posted by lealf-ye
The above could be right, but needs more stats to prove.
I just tell from my perception, but it could be wrong.

Comments from DOs or future DOs for their own professions could be baised. Ok...Whatever..... Your guys are always right.
However, no one can directly prove that the majority of the DOs prefer DO over MD, so maybe I am not always wrong. Tell me otherwise. I will apology for my mistake. Can you prove?

Doesn't this speak (literally) for itself?

Hazam, is that you?

See below...

🙄

 

[haujun]

It is rather unfortunate when the thread turns away from the original topic and turn it into ever so unproductive MD vs DO debate. It is tragic when premeds bash other premeds when they are in a same boat.

REMEMBER: Being number #1 Doctor for your patients is much more important than getting into that "X" medical school.

I am sure your next (at least) 7-12 years of medical training will help you learn the importance of above statement. It is a long path...Lets help each other.

From MS II.

 

[exmike]

Originally posted by sophiejane


Finally, part of being in medicine is taking the risk that the treatment you prescribe may not work, and may actually do more harm than good. OF course we try to minimize this, but it's part of the territory. Take Pthalydimide, for example. It was widely prescribed for morning sickness in the 1950s until it was proven to cause horrific birth defects (this drug is now termed a "teratogen" meaning "monster-producing") and yet thousands of doctors (mostly MDs, since there were few DOs in practice at the time) prescribed it to their patients before they knew about the side effects. There are many other drugs and techiques which are no longer used for similar reasons.

From my recollection, Thalidomide wasnt approved for use in the US, so most thalidomide babies are from outside the US, which of course has no D.O.'s

 

[calcrew14]

Originally posted by sophiejane
First of all: please please please don't do a DO degree only if you can't get into an allopathic school. People who do often end up bitter and do not represent the profession very well. Just retake the MCAT and go allopathic--you will be happier in the long run.

Since me and my future patients come first. Representing my profession, whatever it might be, doesn't rank as high on the priority list. So my advice is the other way around. I am confident that both Dr. Andrew Taylor Still and I myself would be more than happy if I truely know what I am doing in term of patients' management. I don't need to elaborate any further, do I?

Make sure that one has a good application strategy when he/she applies to both schools though. I gave my first choice schools about 4-8 weeks of head starts respectively. That's one way to avoid unnecessary nonrefundable deposit of $1,000-2,000. Every out-of-stater probably should apply to PCOM because it costs only $250 to secure the seat. (I didn't.)

The turn around time for osteopathic schools is much more predictable.

I wouldn't trust anyone including the adcoms. No one really knows how I would fare in my medical career.

Good luck everyone.

 

[sophiejane]

Originally posted by exmike
From my recollection, Thalidomide wasnt approved for use in the US, so most thalidomide babies are from outside the US, which of course has no D.O.'s

I stand corrected. Thanks for setting the record straight.

 

[Idiopathic]

Originally posted by exmike
From my recollection, Thalidomide wasnt approved for use in the US, so most thalidomide babies are from outside the US, which of course has no D.O.'s

mostly true, the most famous thalidomide case was from the US.

"In 1960 the widespread use of the drug thalidomide in nearly twenty countries later yielded a tragic epidemic of limbless babies born to mothers who thought they were using a mild sedative.

Food and Drug Administration medical officer Dr. Frances Oldham Kelsey refused approval of thalidomide for distribution in the United States, despite early news of the drug's success and pressure from its U.S. manufacturer, The Merrell Company. While the drug's effects on animals tested negative to malformation, Dr. Kelsey mistrusted the sleeping pill that did not cause sleepiness in animals.

She was not told that her suspicions were correct when, in November 1961, West Germany reported to the FDA that thalidomide had been associated with birth defects. Told instead was The Merrell Company, which had furnished nearly 1,100 doctors (almost 250 obstetricians and gynecologists) with samples of the drug. Disbelieving West German evidence, The Merrell Company wrote only a brief letter of warning to just 10 percent of the physicians to whom thalidomide was distributed. They were still hoping for the drug's FDA approval and promising prescription sales.

Thalidomide's danger to pregnant women was not made public in the United States until 1962, a year after it was recognized abroad. The Washington Post broke the story about Dr. Kelsey's good judgment, and President Kennedy ordered a crash program to retrieve all samples of thalidomide. For her role in preventing thalidomide distribution, Dr. Kelsey received the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service in 1962.

In that same year, Sherri Finkbine, a thalidomide-exposed pregnant woman, was denied the U.S. abortion she sought for medical reasons, but did obtain one in Sweden. Her harrowing, well-publicized odyssey helped arouse sentiment for abortion law reform.

Although widely banned, thalidomide remained available for limited use as a leprosy treatment. It was controversially revived in the 1990s as an experimental treatment for tuberculosis and certain AIDS-related wasting illnesses."

 

[Stranger]

Originally posted by sophiejane
First of all: please please please don't do a DO degree only if you can't get into an allopathic school. People who do often end up bitter and do not represent the profession very well. Just retake the MCAT and go allopathic--you will be happier in the long run.

Also, before you go making sweeping statements about OMT, a subject you know very little about, I suggest you do some research other than looking at one website.

Finally, part of being in medicine is taking the risk that the treatment you prescribe may not work, and may actually do more harm than good. OF course we try to minimize this, but it's part of the territory. Take Pthalydimide, for example. It was widely prescribed for morning sickness in the 1950s until it was proven to cause horrific birth defects (this drug is now termed a "teratogen" meaning "monster-producing") and yet thousands of doctors (mostly MDs, since there were few DOs in practice at the time) prescribed it to their patients before they knew about the side effects. There are many other drugs and techiques which are no longer used for similar reasons.

OMT, however, has and extremely low occurance of injury or poor side effects, much lower than that of any prescribed or over the counter medication, including aspirin and ibuprofen.

It may not work for everyone, but it works for many, and it is far less dangerous than drugs. That is why DOCTORS prescribe it--if it doesn't work, they can use drugs, or use drugs in combination with OMT. THere are many, many happy and pain-free patients of DOs out there who have been successfully treated with OMT.

Why not just start by prescribing the patient a placebo? That's basically what you're suggesting. There are little or no side effects, and lots of patients will improve. I have looked at way more than one website, and I haven't found an evidence that OMM works. Do you know of any? I'd love to see it.

 

[Shinken]

Originally posted by Stranger
There are little or no side effects, and lots of patients will improve.

I don't get why people are so against placebos. If, like you say, the patient will improve, then why not? Would you rather be given nothing and suffer the pain or be given a placebo and get better?

Some aspects of OMT are kind of hard to swallow (craniosacral, for example) but other aspects of OMT have been shown effective for conditions such as lower back pain and otitis media. Check these out:

http://www.aafp.org/afp/20000301/tips/17.html

http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/157/9/861

 

[sophiejane]

Originally posted by Stranger
Why not just start by prescribing the patient a placebo? That's basically what you're suggesting.

Actually, that is not what I am suggesting. As I said, OMM is used effectively in conjunction with meds or in place of it, and offers little or no side effects. That is not the same as "prescribing" a placebo. I am not aware of any place in which placebos are "prescribed" except in research.

If it works, what is the problem? If it doesn't work, that's why the DOs who practice OMM are physicians and can prescribe other treatments if necessary.

I find it amusing that some in medicine are threatened by such a simple thing as using your hands to heal. Maybe it is just fear of the unknown. When administered correctly by a DO, OMM certainly poses no threat to the general patient poplulation or to the medical profession, so I am curious as to why there are people who are so passionately against it.

 

[stomper627]

Originally posted by Stranger
Why not just start by prescribing the patient a placebo? That's basically what you're suggesting. There are little or no side effects, and lots of patients will improve. I have looked at way more than one website, and I haven't found an evidence that OMM works. Do you know of any? I'd love to see it.

I myself do not have any studies. However OMT is not just HVLA. Much of it is similar to what Physical Therapists, Athletic Trainers, Strength and Conditioning specialists, and massage therapists do. Are you discounting all manual therapy?....Or just HVLA? Will you refer your injured patients to PT or OT?
Myself, as an athlete and a bodybuilder will atest to much of it personally. Much of the aches and pains can be relieved with a little bit of manipulation or myofascial release or counterstrain, etc. I have also been injured and rehabbed with a PT and without....lets say Ive done much better with the PT. Also as a bodybuilder, OMM has helped with my symmetry...as Ive felt more neutral in my lifting.
I wonder why even the AMA recommends stretching before and after exercise....hmmm.....some OMM is very similar to simple stretching. Dont discredit all of it.
stomper

 

[calcrew14]

Good game everyone. 😎 👍 🙂
Can I play?

I bet that the non aggressive nature of osteopathic medicine saved a lot of lives back in the "dark age" when neither accurate diagnosis nor specific treatments were available. I believe that symptomatic treatments often hurt more than helped, some medications were even poisonous and surgeons probably weren't much better than butchers then. So I can see why not only allopathists but also allopathic fans themselves felt a kind of threatened by OD. Things are quite different nowadays. There is no reason for that sense of insecurity anymore. Even though the non aggressive nature of OMM may not save as many lives as before, it still helps medicine more than hurt. EVERYONE just have to learn how to handle it appropriately.