cranial omm?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
valkairon said:
Can someone explain to me why cranial seems to be held in less regard than the rest of the body even by DO students?
Click to expand...

Are you aware of the concept and its apparent mechanism of action? The way you diagnose is just as silly too
 
Because it's cranial.
 
dntke1518 said:
Lolz no need to feed dental troll...
Click to expand...

It was one of the first things that came up for cranial on google. Should be easy enough to find on his/her own. Which, begs the question what's this thread for?

Wasn't passing any judgment on it. He/she can read and assess cranial for him/herself. ;-)
 
Yeah he is just here to get someone's jimmies rustled.
 
Just a curiosity on two parts.

1) What is Cranial supposed to treat? Migraines?

2) Historically did we at the time of the invention of Cranial still not know that fontanels go away and turn into unmovable connective tissue sutures?
 
serenade said:
Just a curiosity on two parts.

1) What is Cranial supposed to treat? Migraines?

2) Historically did we at the time of the invention of Cranial still not know that fontanels go away and turn into unmovable connective tissue sutures?
Click to expand...

Check out babdoc's link a few posts back to the cranial academy website... it'll answer both your questions, though it probably won't put your mind at ease. It's some pretty weird stuff.
 
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ePTZezN_Iw[/YOUTUBE]
 
Best dialogue I had with my cranial OMM professor. She was dead serious when saying this. There were two hundred of us, half supine on the OMM tables and the other half doing the vault hold. Lights were dim downed and she was speaking in soft undertones.

professor lecturing: "feel the cranial bones move and flow with the cranial rhythm. It has been documented that you can manipulate the cranial bones by angstroms with the CV4 maneuver"

Me: "Umm professor, atoms are measured in angstroms, are you sure about that."

professor: "exactly!"

Here is what I want to do with cranial OMM (sorry, i'm just frustrated- 6 weeks of 4 hours each with attendance required is way too much for cranial OMM)

Kitty_Gunner_by_LoztSn1p3r.gif
(originally posted by Guero)
 
It is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever had the displeasure of learning. I can't believe they teach us something that is so downright stupid.
 
serenade said:
Just a curiosity on two parts.

2) Historically did we at the time of the invention of Cranial still not know that fontanels go away and turn into unmovable connective tissue sutures?
Click to expand...

I'm sure they did. Cranial was made up in the early 1900's (1930's I believe).
 
The only thing I was thinking during those 6 weeks...A witch!!!...burn 'er!!!!

Monty-Python-and-the-Holy-Grail-19751.jpg
 
Last edited:
I can't believe I made it through OMS-1 and OMS-2 with virtually zero cranial training. I mean I'm not sad about it, but we learned the Vault Hold, Venous Sinus Drainage, and CV4 technique and that's it. I don't think we've spent more than 4 hours total on cranial technique.

I get cranial questions that come up in COMBANK and I'm always like "Sphenobasilar what the now?"

Hopefully the COMLEX doesn't have much on there because I don't really plan to "learn it" for boards either.
 
I'll be matriculating in the fall. I'm interested in seeing more OMM and making up my mind at that point in time, but is there anything else in OMM relatively as kooky as cranial? I spoke to a professor and she recommended some videos ... it was a little ... well, embarrassing to be honest.
 
Mehd School said:
I'll be matriculating in the fall. I'm interested in seeing more OMM and making up my mind at that point in time, but is there anything else in OMM relatively as kooky as cranial? I spoke to a professor and she recommended some videos ... it was a little ... well, embarrassing to be honest.
Click to expand...

It is VERY embarrassing. Most of it is embarrassing, minus a few techniques. Thankfully, I am almost to the point where I never have to see/hear/or use it ever again.

I, like you, had an open mind when I started school. After about 4 lectures in OMM I thought I was being punked.
 
I'm a pretty open minded guy and I'm looking forward to learning OMM, I have talked to a several people (on the patient side) that have had very good experiences with it. While shadowing a family medicine doc I saw him use it several times and the patients sure seemed to respond well. However, I have yet to hear even one positive thing about cranial. It seems to me that all of the "witchcraft" and "kooky" references I hear about, stem from cranial. One would think that OMM might have a better reputation and better reception if they did away with cranial entirely.
 
Cranial is a very strange entity that no one can really explain. I learned my manipulation techniques very well and use them every day but I never did "get" the feel of cranial and didn't learn it. However, I do go see my "cranial" guy once a year to be re-aligned and I tell you I feel so much better. The sinus stuffiness is gone, the headaches are gone, my neck is not so tight, etc. For those who "get it", it works wonders, but for the reg DO out there, it's just voodoo.
 
I feel your pain -- we had a DO/PhD on the board (whatever) of the Cranial Academy who taught our class -- very nice guy but had that "lights are on but we're not sure who's home" look about him-- whatever---

I went into TCOM with an open mind -- I had looked into chiropractic and saw some of the sham research they were doing and thought,"Wow, TCOM has the ORC funded by NIH so there should be some good research and they would HAVE to teach by scientific principle and be honest enough to say,"We don't know" if they didn't know and not make some BS up".....nothing could be further from the truth --

After seeing the BS that went on with regular OMM (which I use with positive results by the way), when we got to cranial, I just could not drink the Kool Aid ---

The mental leaps to go from one pulsating neuron in a petri dish to palpating mitochondrial respiration was just too much -- I don't care who the hell had the "flash" for "gills of a fish" -- it was just too much. Right up there with telling me that I could palpate the celiac ganglion (located on the anterior surface of the lumbar vertebrae) by placing my fingers at the same level lining them up from the umbilicus down towards the pelvis and perform the "Celiac Ganglion Release" through anywhere from 12 to 18 inches of tissue/organ/muscle -- Do I look stupid to you?

My falling out with the OMM Department came when these tough young studs who proclaimed themselves to be anatomy studmeisters and didn't know the difference between the inferior angle of the scapula and the spine of the scapula. I asked the dual boarded prof the question twice -- both times was given the wrong answer.

So, as with everything, I had to do some learing on my own and have been quite successful with my patients. No voodoo, just standard manipulation of the MSK structure.

I find it interesting that the most productive research to come out of the ORC for a long time (at least when I was there) that wasn't a retrospective study was when Marty Knott set up the canine model that occluded cardiac vessels and found discernable, reproducible changes in the TSpine area congruent with what osteopathic theory holds....but it was when he was a 3rd year med student -- none of the paid, big name researchers had done anything close to it.

I would think cranial could be settled in an afternoon --- grab some lasers like they use in construction/surveying, have a run of patients come in and lie down and set the lasers to measure any movement of cranial bones -- if they move and you can prove that the movement is enough to be palpated, you've made your point...if not, well, you've made your point also ---

But that won't happen because too much political power is wielded by the OMM/Cranial crowd and we all know that only OMM makes DOs different, right? Clowns---

I also find it interesting that after so many years, the AOA is still trying to figure out how the hell to define a DO? Really -- you geniuses are still playing around with that after all these years -- do something worthwhile for a change and quit putting a gun to our head with the idea that we can't maintain board certification unless we fork over the cash to be members of the AOA --

If you want to know why people are booking to ACGME residencies and not coming back -- 1) Cranial/OMM - it's taught with substandard methods and requires a suspension of disbelief in a lot of cases. 2) We'd like to be able to interact with our allopathic COLLEAGUES on a more scientific level about this rather than cling to old theories -- big hint -- the year starts with "20" not "18". 3) Quit trying to be distinctive when you're really not -- if you want to be distinctive, figure out a way to really embrace holistic medicine, not just recite the party line and bring out OMM. Note to AOA: It's not OMM that makes DOs different

So...enough rant and I've got my flame suit on....yeah, I'm more than a little jaded about the crap that passed for education in this area -- I mean, Kuchera and Kuchera blatantly goes against known anatomic physiology in some of their books and caused a boatload of confusion during our anatomy classes and no one called them on it.
 
Best part of cranial during OMM class is laying on a table in a dark room for 1/2 hour. Mmm...!
 
The theory behind cranial is unbelievably quackey. It's an embarrassment that it is allowed to be taught in schools that claim to teach modern medicine. Got my fingers crossed that whatever school I end up choosing doesn't have more than a couple hours of cranial in its curriculum.
 
JustPlainBill said:
I feel your pain -- we had a DO/PhD on the board (whatever) of the Cranial Academy who taught our class -- very nice guy but had that "lights are on but we're not sure who's home" look about him-- whatever---

I went into TCOM with an open mind -- I had looked into chiropractic and saw some of the sham research they were doing and thought,"Wow, TCOM has the ORC funded by NIH so there should be some good research and they would HAVE to teach by scientific principle and be honest enough to say,"We don't know" if they didn't know and not make some BS up".....nothing could be further from the truth --

After seeing the BS that went on with regular OMM (which I use with positive results by the way), when we got to cranial, I just could not drink the Kool Aid ---

The mental leaps to go from one pulsating neuron in a petri dish to palpating mitochondrial respiration was just too much -- I don't care who the hell had the "flash" for "gills of a fish" -- it was just too much. Right up there with telling me that I could palpate the celiac ganglion (located on the anterior surface of the lumbar vertebrae) by placing my fingers at the same level lining them up from the umbilicus down towards the pelvis and perform the "Celiac Ganglion Release" through anywhere from 12 to 18 inches of tissue/organ/muscle -- Do I look stupid to you?

My falling out with the OMM Department came when these tough young studs who proclaimed themselves to be anatomy studmeisters and didn't know the difference between the inferior angle of the scapula and the spine of the scapula. I asked the dual boarded prof the question twice -- both times was given the wrong answer.

So, as with everything, I had to do some learing on my own and have been quite successful with my patients. No voodoo, just standard manipulation of the MSK structure.

I find it interesting that the most productive research to come out of the ORC for a long time (at least when I was there) that wasn't a retrospective study was when Marty Knott set up the canine model that occluded cardiac vessels and found discernable, reproducible changes in the TSpine area congruent with what osteopathic theory holds....but it was when he was a 3rd year med student -- none of the paid, big name researchers had done anything close to it.

I would think cranial could be settled in an afternoon --- grab some lasers like they use in construction/surveying, have a run of patients come in and lie down and set the lasers to measure any movement of cranial bones -- if they move and you can prove that the movement is enough to be palpated, you've made your point...if not, well, you've made your point also ---

But that won't happen because too much political power is wielded by the OMM/Cranial crowd and we all know that only OMM makes DOs different, right? Clowns---

I also find it interesting that after so many years, the AOA is still trying to figure out how the hell to define a DO? Really -- you geniuses are still playing around with that after all these years -- do something worthwhile for a change and quit putting a gun to our head with the idea that we can't maintain board certification unless we fork over the cash to be members of the AOA --

If you want to know why people are booking to ACGME residencies and not coming back -- 1) Cranial/OMM - it's taught with substandard methods and requires a suspension of disbelief in a lot of cases. 2) We'd like to be able to interact with our allopathic COLLEAGUES on a more scientific level about this rather than cling to old theories -- big hint -- the year starts with "20" not "18". 3) Quit trying to be distinctive when you're really not -- if you want to be distinctive, figure out a way to really embrace holistic medicine, not just recite the party line and bring out OMM. Note to AOA: It's not OMM that makes DOs different

So...enough rant and I've got my flame suit on....yeah, I'm more than a little jaded about the crap that passed for education in this area -- I mean, Kuchera and Kuchera blatantly goes against known anatomic physiology in some of their books and caused a boatload of confusion during our anatomy classes and no one called them on it.
Click to expand...

This post really struck home with me. For a few reasons: 1) I honestly entered into osteopathic medical school wanting to learn OMM. Within a couple weeks, the way the curriculum was structured completely made me lose interest. Every time I saw OMM used before entering medical school, it was high yield MSK techniques. 2) We just covered the celiac ganglia and I couldn't believe what I was hearing/attempting to do in lab 3) we just started in on some cranial and I want to cut myself 4)Kuchera (Jr) is the chair of our OMM department--seems like a nice man and I know he is a huge name in the osteopathic world--but also very much an 1800's AT Still osteopath purist to the fullest extent.

I mentioned this before on SDN, but I'll mention it again here. Last semester during a small group discussion about evidence based medicine, I had a conversation with the Co-chair of the OPP department where I was asking about the practicality of some of these OMM techniques and the evidence supporting them. After I thoroughly frustrated him, he proceeded in comparing his belief in God to his belief in OMM (smh still can't believe that happened). Then he asked me what I'd like to see happen at the school. I replied that I'd like to see the school modernize the OMM curriculum. He asked what I meant by that and I explained how I feel that only the most practical and high yield MSK techniques that are used on a regular basis by practicing physicians should be taught to the general student body. This way we will learn and become very proficient at the high yield "useful stuff" that we are most likely to use. The "other techniques" should be reserved for 5th year OMM folks and NMM/OMM residents that are interested in them. When he finished telling me that I was going to be trouble when we get into some of the "other stuff", he actually said he agreed with me... mentioning something to do with how it takes a long time to master the techniques (like cranial) well enough to really be effective with them anyways--in other words, 2 hours a week isn't enough time spent with it to be proficient.

Fast forward 3 months--I'm learning cranial 2 hours a week.
 
Last edited:
I know I'm one of the few pro-cranial folks around these parts, so I'll be brief.

1) The theory, as developed and stated, is a little silly. The mechanisms as applied today (cranial nerve/autonomic dysfxn) do make some sense.
2) The practice, as it is now, seems to be at least anecdotally effective.
3) Evidence for cranial is lacking; this is at least partly due to the difficulties encountered in other areas of OMM research.
4) Kenobi's version of "modern" OMM education is a great idea. Most students don't care, so cranial training should be concentrated on those who really want it.

Image is important. But manipulation is an important part of who we are. I think the answer is for the osteopathic community to develop the body of research on cranial, so that it moves from a fringe treatment to an accepted treatment, at least for several very specific conditions.
 
dntke1518 said:
Lolz no need to feed dental troll...
Click to expand...

Eh, not many trolls can attend two schools simultaneously:

valkairon said:
"You get out and think you're gonna be a rich dentist. You're half right, you'll be a dentist"
"We have lost our profession and I don't like it. I don't like it and it's not gonna stop."
These are the things I kept hearing from dentists at the midwinter meeting these past few days. It's not very reassuring to a first year dental student going to one of the most expensive schools out there... Anyone here disagree? Anyone want to validate my career choice? Or were they right to disabuse me of the idea that I'll have a bright future?
Click to expand...

valkairon said:
Is it legit? if it really works, how come MD's aren't doing it too? I go to an osteopathic school, and I'm going to learn it, but it doesn't seem very scientific. ha
Click to expand...
 
costales said:
Eh, not many trolls can attend two schools simultaneously:
Click to expand...

LOL good find, also this one as well

valkairon said:
Don't worry about it. I'm only 20 and I got into three schools. I was still 19 at my first interview. One of the schools did ask me if I thought my age would be a disadvantage which kind of offended me since I've done the same amount of work. I don't understand how the average age is 26. o.0" As long as you're mature and make it clear to them that you're going to take it seriously, it shouldn't be a problem.
Click to expand...

:bullcrap:
 
JediZero said:
I know I'm one of the few pro-cranial folks around these parts, so I'll be brief.

1) The theory, as developed and stated, is a little silly. The mechanisms as applied today (cranial nerve/autonomic dysfxn) do make some sense.
2) The practice, as it is now, seems to be at least anecdotally effective.
3) Evidence for cranial is lacking; this is at least partly due to the difficulties encountered in other areas of OMM research.
4) Kenobi's version of "modern" OMM education is a great idea. Most students don't care, so cranial training should be concentrated on those who really want it.

Image is important. But manipulation is an important part of who we are. I think the answer is for the osteopathic community to develop the body of research on cranial, so that it moves from a fringe treatment to an accepted treatment, at least for several very specific conditions.
Click to expand...

Though, the plural of anecdote is not evidence. You're right on with #3. There doesn't seem to be very little, if any, concrete evidence. Studies that are done seem small and have poor statistical power. Don't even get me started on reproducibility...
 
whoops...double post
 
Last edited:
SLC said:
I can't believe I made it through OMS-1 and OMS-2 with virtually zero cranial training. I mean I'm not sad about it, but we learned the Vault Hold, Venous Sinus Drainage, and CV4 technique and that's it. I don't think we've spent more than 4 hours total on cranial technique.

I get cranial questions that come up in COMBANK and I'm always like "Sphenobasilar what the now?"

Hopefully the COMLEX doesn't have much on there because I don't really plan to "learn it" for boards either.
Click to expand...

Same- we barely spent much time on it. Most of us treated it as nap time. Instead, my school does OMM electives during second semester of M2, so if someone really wanted to learn more cranial then they can knock themselves out to their heart's content. I tend to look at that material the night before... then forget it again. Ain't nobody got time for that. Same goes for Chapman's points. Those really chap my arse.
 
For those of you who have taken Step 1, I am noticing 1 or 2 Cranial question when I do practice question from Kaplan's Q-Bank. Are there a lot cranial questions on the boards?
 
Whosis said:
For those of you who have taken Step 1, I am noticing 1 or 2 Cranial question when I do practice question from Kaplan's Q-Bank. Are there a lot cranial questions on the boards?
Click to expand...
I can assure you that there is no cranial on USMLE step 1.
 
I assumed that, I was wondering about COMLEX.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
how much harder does OMM make your life?
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
Goro
Goro
T
OMM Exam questions (generated from your lectures and labs)
Replies
1
Views
808
turtleai
T
H
Is this normal 4th year OMM curriculum??
Replies
7
Views
2K
randommedstudent24
R
D
  • Question Question
DO schools that have the most OMM hours per week?
Replies
12
Views
3K
ijustwannasaveppl
ijustwannasaveppl
painballer27
MD doing OMM
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
ceramicist1899
C
Top