Change the Degree to MDO?

[GUH]

There's no need to nitpick with words and have those exact ones integrated in when they're pretty much already standard parts of MD curricula around the country. You're just being difficult for the sake of it.

What words in any official AMA or ACGME statement of purpose or principles or whatever are you referring to that even approximate the tenets?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Mad Jack]

What words in any official AMA or ACGME statement of purpose or principles or whatever are you referring to that even approximate the tenets?

Schools individually teach such things at their students, it's kind of standard practice. You don't need a fancy mission statement to do something you know. I mean, maybe you do- you seem like the kind of guy that needs directions- but most schools are pretty good about the whole "your patient isn't a disease" thing nowadays.

 

[GUH]

Schools individually teach such things at their students, it's kind of standard practice. You don't need a fancy mission statement to do something you know. I mean, maybe you do- you seem like the kind of guy that needs directions- but most schools are pretty good about the whole "your patient isn't a disease" thing nowadays.

Yeah that doesn't at all prove that the AMA or ACGME have integrated osteopathic principles.

 

[Mad Jack]

Yeah that doesn't at all prove that the AMA or ACGME have integrated osteopathic principles.

The ACGME allows programs to officially apply for Osteopathic recognition, i.e. they fully support programs utilizing osteopathic principles if they want to.

In the undergraduate world, most schools already utilize principles so similar that there is no discernible "osteopathic difference" in regard to approaching patients anymore.

 

[235009]

To all those DO students who say that things will change once the "old guard" no longer holds the positions of power in the AOA: @GUH's posts prove that there will always be that small minority of individuals who are easily manipulated into thinking the status quo is the best and will be the ones who get handed the reigns of these corrupt organizations like AOA and COCA in the future.

 

[GUH]

To all those DO students who say that things will change once the "old guard" no longer holds the positions of power in the AOA: @GUH's posts prove that there will always be that small minority of individuals who are easily manipulated into thinking the status quo is the best and will be the ones who get handed the reigns of these corrupt organizations like AOA and COCA in the future.

The status quo isn't perfect but that doesn't mean that all change is good change. DOs cannot rely on the AMA or ACGME to advance our interests so it's up to us.

 

[22031 Alum]

The status quo isn't perfect but that doesn't mean that all change is good change. DOs cannot rely on the AMA or ACGME to advance our interests so it's up to us.

You have yet to prove what your interests even are, aside from being separate for the sake of it. The need to improve standards has been brought up. The possibility of eliminating discrimination has been brought up. The fact that the profession of medicine will continue to exist has been brought up. The fact that OMM would be able to stand on its merits after rigorous assessment has been brought up. All those are professional interests. Can you name one concrete professional interest that you would like to see advanced?

 

[GUH]

You have yet to prove what your interests even are, aside from being separate for the sake of it. The need to improve standards has been brought up. The possibility of eliminating discrimination has been brought up. The fact that the profession of medicine will continue to exist has been brought up. The fact that OMM would be able to stand on its merits after rigorous assessment has been brought up. All those are professional interests. Can you name one concrete professional interest that you would like to see advanced?

Maximum availability of residency spots in competitive specialties for DOs, for starters.

 

[22031 Alum]

Maximum availability of residency spots in competitive specialties for DOs, for starters.

Ok. That's concrete. So if you could somehow know that a change would ultimately increase the presence of osteopathic grads in competitive specialties, would that be okay? Or even with a guarantee, would you oppose a change because the timeline of said change means it would not benefit you personally?

 

[GUH]

Ok. That's concrete. So if you could somehow know that a change would ultimately increase the presence of osteopathic grads in competitive specialties, would that be okay? Or even with a guarantee, would you oppose a change because the timeline of said change means it would not benefit you personally?

I wouldn't oppose it as much if that were the case, and not at all if serious undergraduate and graduate OMM training (optional or mandatory) survived the process. I obviously don't speak for everyone though. My own match may be affected by the GME merger but probably not.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I wouldn't oppose it as much if that were the case, and not at all if serious undergraduate and graduate OMM training (optional or mandatory) survived the process. I obviously don't speak for everyone though. My own match may be affected by the GME merger but probably not.

I don't think osteopathic manipulative medicine is going to die with a merger of the degree. In fact chances are that it'd explode with plenty of MDs learning it.

 

[MrChance2]

I think any degree change/merger if it would happen is 100% only about money and politics. I'm in favor of unifying DO/MD fwiw.

We had a DMD that was an OMFS resident on my trauma surgery rotation. He saw patients, operated, did chest tubes, talked to patients before and after surgery. For the month I was there not once did anyone bring up that he is a dentist. He had DMD on his badge without hiding it. I wouldn't worry about DO. On the rotation I am on now the medical director is a DO and all the other docs I've met are American trained MDs. I've never heard it brought up.

 

[icevermin]

[deleted]

 

[GUH]

I've said this before, and I'm gonna say it again. MD schools have tracks for people who are interested in a particular type of medicine - urban, rural, whatever. Maybe in 10-15 years, maybe sooner, somebody will raise the question: If you have the same residency training, why the hell are your undergraduate medical educations different? There is literally no reasonable, no justifiable answer to that question. MD schools can have an Osteopathic tract for people who are interested in OMM. When they graduate, they get an OMM distinction.

History shows the AOA has failed the DO profession. GUH is going to refute everything I say without backing it up, but my original post with the link to the JAOA article written by Norman Gevitz highlights how they failed DOs during WW2, they failed CA necessitating the merger, and they are literally failing us now allowing mcDO schools to pop open all over the place with insane numbers of students yet no QC or QA on their clinical rotation sites. It's absolutely pathetic that this is the current state of affairs and to think that we should continue to be distinct because of 4 vague statements or some stupid modality that barely anybody uses in practice is ridiculous. We all want to be doctors. The reason GUH, to answer your question, why people went to a DO school, is to be a doctor. Unfortunately, the vast majority of us, now that we are in DO school, see just how broken the system is!!!

If the Cabinet decides to not renew COCA's accreditation powers, or if the legislature decides there is no need for COCA and its exploitative powers to exist, the organization will fall by the wayside soon. The best way to reign in this nonsense is to call your legislature people. Call your state senators and representatives. I sure am.

Different medical schools have different curricula, even those which award the same degree. Your argument in the first paragraph makes no sense. Also look up the definition of "tract".
There are already medical schools for people who want to be DOs. It does not make sense to go to a DO school then say that nobody else should be allowed to become a DO just because you want to be an MD.

And again, the AOA is not perfect but at least it has not actively worked throughout much of its history to stamp osteopathic medicine out of existence, unlike the AMA (source: Gevitz's book). Also, the AOA is not in charge of accrediting osteopathic medical schools, just as the AMA is not in charge of accrediting allopathic medical schools.

Go ahead and call your state legislatures though, by all means. Efforts to stamp DOs out of existence through state legislation failed in the past and will continue to fail until you build a consensus which even includes those who -gasp- went to DO schools to become DOs.

 

[kenjixshadow]

Efforts to stamp DOs out of existence through state legislation failed in the past and will continue to fail until you build a consensus which even includes those who -gasp- went to DO schools to be eligible to become physicians.

FTFY. DO is just two letter words and a diploma. I'm sure that most DOs went to DO route so they can practice medicine, not to do massage.

 

[GUH]

FTFY. DO is just two letter words and a diploma. I'm sure that most DOs went to DO route so they can practice medicine, not to do massage.

Nobody went to a DO school to do massage.
Some people went to DO schools to become DOs and/or learn OMT in addition to becoming physicians.

 

[22031 Alum]

Nobody went to a DO school to do massage.
Some people went to DO schools to become DOs and/or learn OMT in addition to becoming physicians.

Interesting that you say "in addition to" as opposed to "as part of" becoming physicians or "while" becoming physicians. For all the formal statements you'd like allopathic orgs to make, acting as if OMT is something magically different, and not simply part of being a physician, doesn't seem like the best way to go about that. I mean, historically performing surgery wasn't considered part of being a physician (blah blah Columbia blah blah), but nowadays nobody is saying "Oh, Dr. Alum does surgery in addition to being a physician." It's part of practicing medicine, something that you can choose to learn or not learn. Why is OMT different? (I will not accept "Because history" or "Because holistic" as an answer.)

 

[GUH]

Interesting that you say "in addition to" as opposed to "as part of" becoming physicians or "while" becoming physicians. For all the formal statements you'd like allopathic orgs to make, acting as if OMT is something magically different, and not simply part of being a physician, doesn't seem like the best way to go about that. I mean, historically performing surgery wasn't considered part of being a physician (blah blah Columbia blah blah), but nowadays nobody is saying "Oh, Dr. Alum does surgery in addition to being a physician." It's part of practicing medicine, something that you can choose to learn or not learn. Why is OMT different? (I will not accept "Because history" or "Because holistic" as an answer.)

That is a good point and makes sense.

 

[icevermin]

[delete]