Did anybody have to choose between med and optometry school?

[HuntinDoc]

I know these are two very different fields, but I was wondering if anybody out there had this choice and why you went one way or the other. These seems like a silly question but I really do have a passion for both fields, and would probably be happy either way. Ophthalmology would be ideal but I'm worried that with marginal grades I would really have to work hard and long to get into med school (then I would be worried about matching into ophtho), and I could probably get into opt school at least a year earlier and be on my way. I'm already 25, and feel like I don't have too much time to decide, especially because next fall my course load will be dictated by my choice. Thanks for any input.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Uvault05]

I know these are two very different fields, but I was wondering if anybody out there had this choice and why you went one way or the other. These seems like a silly question but I really do have a passion for both fields, and would probably be happy either way. Ophthalmology would be ideal but I'm worried that with marginal grades I would really have to work hard and long to get into med school (then I would be worried about matching into ophtho), and I could probably get into opt school at least a year earlier and be on my way. I'm already 25, and feel like I don't have too much time to decide, especially because next fall my course load will be dictated by my choice. Thanks for any input.

HuntinDoc,

While I was never all that close to applying to opt school (never took the OAT, for example), I certainly considered the idea after doing retinal-based research and shadowing a terrific ophthalmologist (I got a chance to speak with an optometrist who happened to work in the same clinic as him). Optometry has a ton of advantages--decent pay, good lifestyle, etc. But I found that its potential limitations made it hard for me to choose opt school over medical school. As you pointed out, one can always go to med school and end up doing ophtho, provided he or she really focuses and kicks ass on the boards But what I also struggled with was the idea of specializing at so young an age. I'm heading to med school this fall and although I have ophtho and a few other specialties in the back of my mind, I'm definitely willing and excited to experience other fields along the way. I think most people on SDN would agree that almost everyone pursues a residency in an field that would not have been anticipated at the beginning of med school.

Finally, I considered that someday after completely optometry training, I would live to regret my inability to perform procedures such as cataract surgery. I ultimately chose med school because of the mind-blowing range of opportunity that it will offer. Will it be tough? Of course, but hopefully well worth it in the end

Good luck!

 

[MikeyLu2010]

My gf did...she could have easily been accepted to either school ..but she ended up deciding optometry school because she wanted to raise a family at a fairly young age..And if she went to a med school she would pursue opthomology which would take alot of years away from time to raise her family. at least this was her theory..

 

[sga814]

Alright, well-- let me help you decide:

Optometrist- average salary- 80-100 K
Opthamologist - average salary - 250- 300K

I truly believe that if one tries hard enough- anything can be achieved.

I know that "you shouldn't consider money when choosing medicine as a career"... but hey- don't be hipocritical... because you KNOW you are thinking about it to some degree.

 

[HuntinDoc]

I thank you guys for the honesty and advice -- anybody else with 2 cents I'd love to hear it!

 

[4424]

I thank you guys for the honesty and advice -- anybody else with 2 cents I'd love to hear it!

ophthalmology and optometry are pretty different and each serve very important but different roles. also, many students entering medical school with an idea of what they want to do completely change their mind by third year so you may not want to do ophthalmology at all. if you are sure you want to work with the eye then consider assessing your desire to do surgery and perhaps that would help?

 

[azzarah]

optometry is a primary care field for the eyes. Ophthalmologists can do both primary care (if they so desire) and secondary care as well as surgery/procedures. I'm going into optho (assuming I get in...haha) because I love surgery.

 

[fun8stuff]

I know these are two very different fields, but I was wondering if anybody out there had this choice and why you went one way or the other. These seems like a silly question but I really do have a passion for both fields, and would probably be happy either way. Ophthalmology would be ideal but I'm worried that with marginal grades I would really have to work hard and long to get into med school (then I would be worried about matching into ophtho), and I could probably get into opt school at least a year earlier and be on my way. I'm already 25, and feel like I don't have too much time to decide, especially because next fall my course load will be dictated by my choice. Thanks for any input.

yes... i am 23 and in first year med school (not that many years diff than you). I chose medicine over optometry after shadowing a few optometrists. I woudl be bored with spending the majority of my day asking, "which is better, slide 1 or 2 ... 2 or 3 ... etc". This is kind of a simplification.

With medicine, for about the same amount of schooling (4 yrs) and then a few more years of residency you can have can have much broader options and fewer limitations. 2-3x the income potential. You also get to be the top specialist... whereas optometrist is like a mid-level practioner. A few more years won't amount to much in the long run, and is well worth the benefits for me.

These are just my opinions though... obviously there are good reasons for picking optometry. Since I went to an undergrad with a op school attached, i have many friends who are in op and are loving it.

 

[vtrain]

it can be fustrating only being able to treat a patient so far and then having to refer. your arms are tied to a certain extent in optometry. if you want to do more (much more) for your patients, go with an MD. However, with added scope of practice comes more responsibilities (and headaches).

 

[NEATOMD]

it can be fustrating only being able to treat a patient so far and then having to refer. your arms are tied to a certain extent in optometry. if you want to do more (much more) for your patients, go with an MD.

This isn't really true. You'll find that no matter what field you go into, there will be limits to your care. Saying MD's can do "much more" for their patients is innaccurate. If collectively comparing all MD's to all OD's, it may be true. But every type of doctor is going to have a specific scope of practice that limits them. Some fields have more limits than others. This is true even for specialized docs. A neurosurgeon I know always says, "We spend all our time looking for something treatable, and then when we find one, we refer." Ophthalmologists are in many ways just as limited as any optometrist. You don't see them managing diabetic or heart conditions, removing gallbladders, or putting casts on patients. Same holds true for all doc's: Pulmonologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, EM, ENT...you name it.

Optometry and Ophthalmology are both good fields. Optometrist are actually similar in many ways to pediatricians and family docs. They even get similar pay in many cases. Some optometrist actually make more than MD primary care providers. IE: What you miss often when looking at Optometrist salaries is that many own optical labs that make additional revenue not reported as their "optometrist" income. Optometrists are capable of prescibing orals in many states and some surgical procedures (such as puncal plugs) and in OK, can even perform lasic surgeries. Both are eye specialists. Ophthalmologists do get paid more. Optometrists have much lower insurance rates and this means they have to see less patients to make more money.

 

[tupac_don]

This isn't really true. You'll find that no matter what field you go into, there will be limits to your care. Saying MD's can do "much more" for their patients is innaccurate. If collectively comparing all MD's to all OD's, it may be true. But every type of doctor is going to have a specific scope of practice that limits them. Some fields have more limits than others. This is true even for specialized docs. A neurosurgeon I know always says, "We spend all our time looking for something treatable, and then when we find one, we refer." Ophthalmologists are in many ways just as limited as any optometrist. You don't see them managing diabetic or heart conditions, removing gallbladders, or putting casts on patients. Same holds true for all doc's: Pulmonologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, EM, ENT...you name it.

Optometry and Ophthalmology are both good fields. Optometrist are actually similar in many ways to pediatricians and family docs. They even get similar pay in many cases. Some optometrist actually make more than MD primary care providers. IE: What you miss often when looking at Optometrist salaries is that many own optical labs that make additional revenue not reported as their "optometrist" income. Optometrists are capable of prescibing orals in many states and some surgical procedures (such as puncal plugs) and in OK, can even perform lasic surgeries. Both are eye specialists. Ophthalmologists do get paid more. Optometrists have much lower insurance rates and this means they have to see less patients to make more money.

Well that's an unfair statement. Yea I think everyone realizes that in any field you go to: surgery, internal medicine, psychiatry, you will refer people out and you won't do EVERYTHING. I don't think it's fair to say that ophtalmologists are as limited as optometrists. We are talking about treatment of eyes, not diabetes, not HTN, but eyes. Therefore, ophtalmologists have a lot more freedom in that respect, main thing, they can do surgery. Also MD carries a lot more clout, if you want to be a researcher, you will have a lot more ability to publish and pursue projects if you are an ophtalmologist than if you are an optometrist.

Also as an MD, you can subspecialize, to handle only eye trauma (surgical) or glaucoma, or be highly sophisticated retinal specialist. Last time I checked, optometrists, more or less check your eyes, they don't do surgery and they can't really tx anything, they refer you to an MD.

I think when people say that an MD can do more, they mean in terms of eye treatment. Which is hands down true, unless you become an ophtalmologist, who does not do surgery, than the line b/w the ophtalmologist and optometrist is somewhat blurred, but even then I think that ophtalmologist can do more in terms of research.

Just my 2cents.

 

[fun8stuff]

This isn't really true. You'll find that no matter what field you go into, there will be limits to your care. Saying MD's can do "much more" for their patients is innaccurate. If collectively comparing all MD's to all OD's, it may be true. But every type of doctor is going to have a specific scope of practice that limits them. Some fields have more limits than others. This is true even for specialized docs. A neurosurgeon I know always says, "We spend all our time looking for something treatable, and then when we find one, we refer." Ophthalmologists are in many ways just as limited as any optometrist. You don't see them managing diabetic or heart conditions, removing gallbladders, or putting casts on patients. Same holds true for all doc's: Pulmonologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, EM, ENT...you name it.

Optometry and Ophthalmology are both good fields. Optometrist are actually similar in many ways to pediatricians and family docs. They even get similar pay in many cases. Some optometrist actually make more than MD primary care providers. IE: What you miss often when looking at Optometrist salaries is that many own optical labs that make additional revenue not reported as their "optometrist" income. Optometrists are capable of prescibing orals in many states and some surgical procedures (such as puncal plugs) and in OK, can even perform lasic surgeries. Both are eye specialists. Ophthalmologists do get paid more. Optometrists have much lower insurance rates and this means they have to see less patients to make more money.

One small point to add... actually, because opthamologists are MDs they could theorectically handle people's diabetes or heart conditions, with in the bounds of the law. Heck, I believe they could even perform open heart surgery. Will they do this? No, but the MD grants them this authority. If an optometrist were to attempt anything more than checking someone's eye prescription and writing scripts for minor eye antibiotics, they would be in trouble with the law. It is rather naive to say that optometrists and opthamologists are equal.... there is about a 4 year difference in training, if i'm not mistaken.

 

[NEATOMD]

One small point to add... actually, because opthamologists are MDs they could theorectically handle people's diabetes or heart conditions, with in the bounds of the law. Heck, I believe they could even perform open heart surgery. Will they do this? No, but the MD grants them this authority.

In what bounds of the law do you see a licensed ophthalmologist performing open heart surgery without the approval or supervision of a heart specialist?

Answer: They can't

Further, Diabetes and heart conditions are innately related. Optometrists and Ophthalmologist deal with problems related to these diseases on a daily basis. I would even take a stab at saying that they are a sizable portion of their cases.

One more thing, Ophthalmologists can be DO's as well.

 

[NEATOMD]

Therefore, ophtalmologists have a lot more freedom in that respect, main thing, they can do surgery. Also MD carries a lot more clout, if you want to be a researcher, you will have a lot more ability to publish and pursue projects if you are an ophtalmologist than if you are an optometrist.

Also as an MD, you can subspecialize, to handle only eye trauma (surgical) or glaucoma, or be highly sophisticated retinal specialist. Last time I checked, optometrists, more or less check your eyes, they don't do surgery and they can't really tx anything, they refer you to an MD.

I think that ophtalmologist can do more in terms of research.

Not wanting to start a war here guys...

But, both of these posts reflect the prevailing MD school of thought on the matter, which happens to be misinformed. I think you can take my word on the fact that I know alot about the boundaries of medicine for OD, DO, and MD. Mostly because I have family members who are each. Specifically, I even have an identical twin brother who's chosen the OD route, while I chose to go the MD route.

And, I don't know WHEN the last time you checked was...but optometrists CAN and do treat patients. Contacts and glasses are treatments. As are punctal plugs. As is lasic surgery (which some can do).

Further, MD's also refer patients to OD's, not just ophtho MD's. Its true, your gonna have get over your MD ego to believe it but it is. Some MD's even call optometrists to inquire about tx's and perscriptions for their patients regarding eye problems.

If you truly look into who does eye research then you will find that optometrists DO alot of eye research. As a matter of fact many of the instruments that eye surgeons use were either designed or improved by optometrists. Some optometrists even train ophthalmologists in how to use such surgical devices.

Why/How could that be? There are far more schools out there training optometrists who conduct research, then there are ophthalmology training centers. Last year, there was only one ophtho program accepting new students through the match (look it up).

Also, some optometrists can specialize to treat specific eye disorders: glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, geriatrics, and pediatrics.

Finally, emphatically, I'll restate what I previously wrote: Optometrists are able to prescribe orals in many states. They are even certified to perform surgeries in some. Though, they aren't universilly (country-wide) on equal grounds, the difference between the two are gradually becoming more blurred.

Personally, I think it is a mistake for optometrists to pursue complete scope of practice "equality" with Ophtho's. Insurance increases would cost many their practices.

 

[wtwei02]

This is a joke right?? I'm not even sure where to start with the inaccuracies.

Not wanting to start a war here guys...

But, both of these posts reflect the prevailing MD school of thought on the matter, which happens to be misinformed. I think you can take my word on the fact that I know alot about the boundaries of medicine for OD, DO, and MD. Mostly because I have family members who are each. Specifically, I even have an identical twin brother who's an OD, while I chose to go the MD route.

And, I don't know WHEN the last time you checked was...but optometrists CAN and do treat patients. Contacts and glasses are treatments. As are punctal plugs. As is lasic surgery (which some can do).

Further, MD's also refer patients to OD's, not just ophtho MD's. Its true, your gonna have get over your MD ego to believe it but it is. Some MD's even call optometrists to inquire about tx's and perscriptions for their patients regarding eye problems.

If you truly look into who does eye research then you will find that optometrists DO alot of eye research. As a matter of fact many of the instruments that eye surgeons use were either designed or improved by optometrists. Some optometrists even train ophthalmologists in how to use such surgical devices.

Why/How could that be? There are far more schools out there training optometrists who conduct research, then there are ophthalmology training centers. Last year, there was only one ophtho program accepting new students through the match (look it up).

Also, some optometrists can specialize to treat specific eye disorders: glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, geriatrics, and pediatrics.

Finally, emphatically, I'll restate what I previously wrote: Optometrists are able to prescribe orals in many states. They are even certified to perform surgeries in some. Though, they aren't universilly (country-wide) on equal grounds, the difference between the two are gradually becoming more blurred.

Personally, I think it is a mistake for optometrists to pursue complete scope of practice "equality" with Ophtho's. Insurance increases would cost many their practices.

 

[cromagnon]

and I could probably get into opt school at least a year earlier and be on my way. I'm already 25, and feel like I don't have too much time to decide, especially because next fall my course load will be dictated by my choice. Thanks for any input.

dude, 25 is young. an extra year or two isn't going to mean jack in the long run. if anything, extra time or work to get into medical school should be seen as a means to an end rather than as a possible reason to forego the md route. this is your life your talking about here, decide what you want and make it happen.

btw i started medical school at 32 and had a 2.12 undergrad gpa. before applying, i busted my ass taking night classes and summer sessions for two years while working full time. did it suck? yes, but i brought my gpa up to a decent level and got in.

its not impossible, you just have to decide what you are willing to do/give up to get what you want.

good luck

 

[NEATOMD]

This is a joke right?? I'm not even sure where to start with the inaccuracies.

Start with the nonexistant inaccuracy and sight your source.

 

[wtwei02]

Why/How could that be? There are far more schools out there training optometrists who conduct research, then there are ophthalmology training centers. Last year, there was only one ophtho program accepting new students through the match (look it up).

Well...lets start easy. See, in the "match", there is something that we call the San Francisco match, to compliment the regular match. They have a website at Sfmatch.org. Through the early match, you apply to specialties such as ophtho and neurosurgery. I'm not sure which source you used to conclude that there was only one ophtho program accepting new students, because the SFmatch lists atleast 120 programs, each accepting atleast 2 residents per year. But back to the original topic, 25 is way young. Take your time, do some more research/shadowing, and try to figure out which suits you. Look outside ophtho, because even if that's what you'll eventually go into if you go to med school, you'll still have to do 2 years of head to toe medicine, and 1 intern year before you get to the eyes.

 

[NEATOMD]

Well...lets start easy. See, in the "match", there is something that we call the San Francisco match, to compliment the regular match. They have a website at Sfmatch.org.

And, since I was talking about the NRMP specifically when I said that, how does that make me wrong? I used the NRMP published stats.

Though, I guess, I could have specified that, I figured you would assume it when I only said "the match".

 

[fun8stuff]

And, since I was talking about the NRMP specifically when I said that, how does that make me wrong? I used the NRMP published stats.

Though, I guess, I could have specified that, I figured you would assume it when I only said "the match".

grow up and come back once you make it into the real world. try getting into undergrad before you start talking crap. you stated nothing but blatant exaggerations and inaccuracies.

 

[SteveUTexas]

And, since I was talking about the NRMP specifically when I said that, how does that make me wrong? I used the NRMP published stats.

Though, I guess, I could have specified that, I figured you would assume it when I only said "the match".

It makes you wrong because there is more than one program that train ophthalmologist.

 

[NEATOMD]

Thank you guys. You just proved my point. HuntinDoc (and anyone else who cares), take note:

The majority of the medical doctor world would rather ignore the truth and mock those who disagree than to accept and deal with the reality of this situation.

You can look up the information and find that everything I have said is accurate. Notice that nothing I said was ever proven wrong, and that what I did say had to be misused to prove their points. Notice the rude, condescending responses. I'm sorry if they might have given a bad impression of medicine. Not all M.D.'s (or med students) are this way.

I understand the opinion of ophthalmology residents (such as wtwei02) and some doc's who believe firmly in their choices for educations and practice. They've worked hard for what they've accomplished and obviously have chosen their paths to suit their own personal preferences. They deserve respect. It's the same respect that other medical providers, be they MD, DO, OD, PA, EMT, CNA's (etc) each deserve. We're all proud of our work.

Learning to accept other providers and their roles is an important part of being in the medical profession. Unfortunately, many never get it.

Many do

Take the time and effort to not just accept what I say or what they claim is the truth and find the facts. Just a warning, standing for the truth might put you in the line of fire. You just might get ridiculed and looked down on.

Nonetheless, I'm done posting on this thread.

 

[wtwei02]

And, I don't know WHEN the last time you checked was...but optometrists CAN and do treat patients. Contacts and glasses are treatments. As are punctal plugs. As is lasic surgery (which some can do).
Finally, emphatically, I'll restate what I previously wrote: Optometrists are able to prescribe orals in many states. They are even certified to perform surgeries in some.

I'll agree with the above, optometrist do treat patients. However, Lasik surgery is performed by MD's and DO's. Even in Oklahoma, the only state where optometrists have been allowed to perform surgery, lasik centers such as TLC use optometrists to "co-manage" patients, meaning they do the pre-op and post-op visits, while a fellowship trained ophtho does the actual surgery. If there are optometrists doing lasik in OK, i don't know about it, and have not been able to find any evidence to support this. If you read my last post, i have not written anything disrespecting other professions. I will be working with optometrists once I start my ophtho residency, and have no problems with them doing what they are trained to do. Most of them are very nice people with no interest in lasik or cataract surgery. However, for you to suggest that someone considering opt vs. md can become an optometrist with many opportunities to do surgery, design surgical equipment, and teach ophthalmologists to use surgical devices is inaccurate and irresponsible. It does not help the original poster make a very important decision. Furthermore, it does nothing to foster OD vs Ophtho relationships, which I believe have been damaged by the quest of a small minority of ODs to gain surgical rights in OK.

By the way, just FYI, I'm only a lowly 4th year med student, trying to enjoy my last few months of being free of responsibilities before I start my intern year...so take my comments with a grain of salt. I may be completely wrong in my assessment, feel free to correct me.

Suggestion for you...be humble enough to know when you are wrong, and when to admit it. I didn't misuse anything you said to prove my point, and the fact is that there are 120+ ophtho programs (producing lots of amazing new research) in the match accepting new students, not just 1.

Keep it friendly guys...

 

[billclinton]

Thank you guys. You just proved my point. HuntinDoc (and anyone else who cares), take note:

The majority of the medical doctor world would rather ignore the truth and mock those who disagree than to accept and deal with the reality of this situation.

You can look up the information and find that everything I have said is accurate. Notice that nothing I said was ever proven wrong, and that what I did say had to be misused to prove their points. Notice the rude, condescending responses. I'm sorry if they might have given a bad impression of medicine. Not all M.D.'s (or med students) are this way.

I understand the opinion of ophthalmology residents (such as wtwei02) and some doc's who believe firmly in their choices for educations and practice. They've worked hard for what they've accomplished and obviously have chosen their paths to suit their own personal preferences. They deserve respect. It's the same respect that other medical providers, be they MD, DO, OD, PA, EMT, CNA's (etc) each deserve. We're all proud of our work.

Learning to accept other providers and their roles is an important part of being in the medical profession. Unfortunately, many never get it.

Many do

Take the time and effort to not just accept what I say or what they claim is the truth and find the facts. Just a warning, standing for the truth might put you in the line of fire. You just might get ridiculed and looked down on.

Nonetheless, I'm done posting on this thread.

Actually, seeing how you are the one trying to argue a point and everybody disagrees with you, it is up to you to prove your point and provide sources. You have had numerous people on here come out and state you are completely wrong or twisting the truth. So what if 1 state out of 50 allows ODs to do limited eye surgeries. The fact of the matter is that 90% of and ODs time is spent checking prescriptions. Unless it is a minor infection, they will refer out ot opthamologist or another MD. By the way, by law MDs are able to treat the whole body (surgeries, casts, diabetes, high blood pressure, etc)... this includes opthamolgists... but not optometrists. Just opthamologists don't generally do this stuff, doesn't mean they can't legally.

My advice to you would be to drop out of OD school, raise your MCAT, and reapply to MD school. You will be much happier and won't feel the need to go around on online forums trying to proove yourself.... you just end up looking like a fool.

 

[billclinton]

I'll agree with the above, optometrist do treat patients. However, Lasik surgery is performed by MD's and DO's. Even in Oklahoma, the only state where optometrists have been allowed to perform surgery, lasik centers such as TLC use optometrists to "co-manage" patients, meaning they do the pre-op and post-op visits, while a fellowship trained ophtho does the actual surgery. If there are optometrists doing lasik in OK, i don't know about it, and have not been able to find any evidence to support this. If you read my last post, i have not written anything disrespecting other professions. I will be working with optometrists once I start my ophtho residency, and have no problems with them doing what they are trained to do. Most of them are very nice people with no interest in lasik or cataract surgery. However, for you to suggest that someone considering opt vs. md can become an optometrist with many opportunities to do surgery, design surgical equipment, and teach ophthalmologists to use surgical devices is inaccurate and irresponsible. It does not help the original poster make a very important decision. Furthermore, it does nothing to foster OD vs Ophtho relationships, which I believe have been damaged by the quest of a small minority of ODs to gain surgical rights in OK.

By the way, just FYI, I'm only a lowly 4th year med student, trying to enjoy my last few months of being free of responsibilities before I start my intern year...so take my comments with a grain of salt. I may be completely wrong in my assessment, feel free to correct me.

Suggestion for you...be humble enough to know when you are wrong, and when to admit it. I didn't misuse anything you said to prove my point, and the fact is that there are 120+ ophtho programs (producing lots of amazing new research) in the match accepting new students, not just 1.

This person has exaggerated or lied about everything. Yes, in OK they can perform certain limited eye surgeries. What they fail to understand is that these are not equivalent to LASIK.

http://optometry.com/news.html

 

[MDdream]

im an optometry student right now, im just finishing up my 2nd year. however, with that said im applying to medical school.

Dont fool yourself and think that OD school is easy, cuz its defintely not. im at school almost everyday from 8-5 (lectures, labs, clinic rotations starting now: pediatrics, low vision, contact lens, family practice, OD-MED).

optometry is a great profession but i decided later on that ive always wanted to be a physician.

 

[HuntinDoc]

Thanks for the candid info. I didn't know this could become so contraversial! I especially appreciate the 25 is young and get it done - I know I can accomplish anything, it's just a long and scary road ahead. I'll continue to do more shadowing, that may be the best way for me to make a choice. I do think I'm leaning towards med school though because of the scope and the fact that the physiology of the entire body facinates me, not just the eye, and like you say I can always change my mind if something else intrests me. Thanks!

 

[CNU2020]

I'm a second year at Illinois college of Optometry... Not sure that my posting here will really help...since noone is generally persuaded in any of these forums... but I'll just throw out some fuel for thought. The simple fact is that Optometry as a profession is very mis-understood. This is partially due to it's ever evolving nature. The other reason, is a simple lack of knowledge. Anyway...

A quick correction to the above... An Optometrist's average salary was last reported by the American Optometric Association to be around $135,000 ... not $80,000. But, I don't blame you for not knowing. It's a small, small number, I guess... but that's enough for me to get by.

In addition, the field of Optometry has many specializations as well. In fact, as an Optometrist, you can do all the refracting you want, or none at all. There are specializations in Low vision (just as there are in Opthl.). Specializations in Vision therapy (treating Binocular vision disorders... which is one example that you will only find in Optometry... not ophthl). Disease manangement, Research and development, (Dr. Neil Hodur OD worked with Welsch Allyn to create the new(er) PAN-OptiC ophthalmoscope that the medical profession now embraces (any 1st year med student will be familiar with this device)).
All in all, given the mean b/w several sources there are reportedly over 90 different sub-specialties for an Optometrist (it is conceded that is not what a 4th year MD has availiable to them.) But the concept is the same... and, honestly, 90 seems like a lot. And, unless you know Optometry better than me... it's hard to argue against this point.

In Above arguments it has been aforementioned that there isn't as much opportunity for research. This is completely in accurate. I would argue that there is equal or more opportunity. Instead, Optometry is infact, very research oriented. I know for a fact that every Optometry student to graduate from ICO is required to do an indepth research thesis. In fact, there are many Optometrists at my school (ICO) and other (academic and non-acedemic) institutions abroad that devote 100% of their time to vision research and employ OD's. For example, Dr. David Lee O.D. PhD. (who hasn't seen a refractive patient in more than 10 years) is a world foremost expert on Color Vision, and has been called to counsil many gov'ts abroad to make changes that will ensure better life for Color deficient individuals (4.3% of the population). This is only one of the many. Need I list more to suffice?

And, YES, it is true that in some cases OD's even develop LASER's that they later train Ophthl's to use. For proof, I give you Larry Biatch OD, PhD. Co-Founder and president of American Medical Vision Technologies, which is responsible of the creating of some of the "Ophthl only" LASER's as well as other surgical and ophthalmic devices (I.E. accomadating IOL's). Dr. Baitch, an Optometrist, will, at times instruct Ophthalmologists to use his newly developed instruments, by giving demonstrations. This is just one example of the fact that Optometry is whatever you make it, and another example of an Optometrist that rarely would offer a refractive examination.

NeatoMD is not completely incorrect in saying that OD's can preform surgeries... including LASIK. However, he is, indeed, slightly behind on times if he was refering to OK as his reference for OD's performing LASIK. However, though in a single remote situation I know of, I can tell you that to the best of my knowledge, the Armed Forces of the United State have trained O.D.'s who have performed "special residencies" in OK. These very, very select few can, as a member of the Armed forces perform LASER Insitu Keratometry, or LASIK. After recent legislation, however, no civillian O.D.'s within the US (or elsewhere that I know of) are performing LASIK. For me (and many of my colleagues), I don't really even see the need to, nor do I want to. The $$$ as a bottom line, is the main reason for this. I see all these cut rate clinics performing LASIK at $200 an eye here is Chicago... which doesn't make much sense for what the LASER's cost. Furthermore, with the new Wavefront technology allowing better corrective surgeries than before, the price of LASIK should increase. However, the LASIK market is already saturated.

So many Med students spout off their 2 cents about what Optometrist know (or should know), never having set foot inside an Optometry school. Let me "let the cat out tof the bag," so to speak. Many of the techniques performed in Ophthl are difficult. I can tell you from experience as an Optometrist I could easily operate a YAG LASER, or even an ARGON LASER for AL Trabeculoplasty. Honestly, any ophthal. will tell you that it is a very easy once one can use a Biomicroscope and Gonioscopic lens (basic tests taught to any 2nd year Optometry student). however, the governing factor,or the main reason that Optometrists won't soon be doing these surgeries is a simple problem of supply and demand. I, as an O.D. cannot offset the price of purchasing the above LASER's with the number of patients I will be seeing in the primary care setting. Second of all, Ophthl, remains sufficient to cover the population's needs in this area. This is why OK has OD's performing surgery... a lack of Ophthl. presence. Thus, in this remote setting, it is feasible for an Optometrist to perform such easy task as would require a YAG LASER or ARGON LASER.

That aside, significant advances in technology now allows the Optometrist to do more than ever before. With Beta scanning, Electroretinograms, and the newest arsenol of OCT and GDx (newer retina scanning machines), to name a few, an Optometrist is able offer great treatment options for many patients with a whole host of diseases, including Diabetes, HTN retinopathy, and Glaucoma with the aid of pharmacological devices. Keep in mind that often the Surgical (couterpart) option is often left as a last resort.

In some cases, recent literate is suggesting that premature Surgical Tx has caused excess undue harm to the pt's total health and vision. Case in point, I give you the latest research done at University of Chicago which suggests that early surgical intervention in Diabetic retinopathy actually may cause excess irreversible harm to the pt. compared to if the patient were to otherwise get the disease under control. Again, the latest research is showing that the retina can resolve much of the damages (as per monitoring by an OCT and theraputic pharmacologic intervention as can be provided by either O.D. or M.D. alike in 48 of the 50 states.

So, now, I have provide many facts to many desputed statements. One must chose for him/herself whether or not to come into the light, or continue to fumble in the darkness.

***As a side: I commend those seekers for wishing to get the facts before making judgments. Furthermore, I can't blame MD's for feeling how they do about Optometry. We chose our professions due to a one bias or another... and that's all reflected here, in the above articles. (In other words, post on an Allopathic forum, get an allopathic biased response.)

P.S. (HUNTIN_DOC) I've spent the last two years of Optometry school learning about the Physiology of the entire body. The difference is that we emphasize it's importance as pertains to the eye. In the end, in order to properly treat the diseases of the eye, one needs to know the entire body process. Anyone that says otherwise is a fool.

 

[wtwei02]

very, very select few can, as a member of the Armed forces perform LASER Insitu Keratometry, or LASIK.

laser insitu keratomileusis

I believe that keratometry refers to the measurement of corneal curvature. The suffix "metry" precludes cutting.

 

[CNU2020]

Yes, yes. You say potato, I say ... well you know.

Half a dozen and six of a kind. You are correct, "keratomileusis" is the more frequently used, more formal term.

"kerato"- meaning as pertains to the cornea
"metry"- distance or as is measured (I.E. thinkness).

Indeed, the term "Keratometry" is usually reserved for the measurement of ophthalmometry (corneal curvature)... correct again!

Thank you for reading so carefully

 

[billclinton]

I'm a second year at Illinois college of Optometry... Not sure that my posting here will really help...since noone is generally persuaded in any of these forums... but I'll just throw out some fuel for thought. The simple fact is that Optometry as a profession is very mis-understood. This is partially due to it's ever evolving nature. The other reason, is a simple lack of knowledge. Anyway...

A quick correction to the above... An Optometrist's average salary was last reported by the American Optometric Association to be around $135,000 ... not $80,000. But, I don't blame you for not knowing. It's a small, small number, I guess... but that's enough for me to get by.

In addition, the field of Optometry has many specializations as well. In fact, as an Optometrist, you can do all the refracting you want, or none at all. There are specializations in Low vision (just as there are in Opthl.). Specializations in Vision therapy (treating Binocular vision disorders... which is one example that you will only find in Optometry... not ophthl). Disease manangement, Research and development, (Dr. Neil Hodur OD worked with Welsch Allyn to create the new(er) PAN-OptiC ophthalmoscope that the medical profession now embraces (any 1st year med student will be familiar with this device)).
All in all, given the mean b/w several sources there are reportedly over 90 different sub-specialties for an Optometrist (it is conceded that is not what a 4th year MD has availiable to them.) But the concept is the same... and, honestly, 90 seems like a lot. And, unless you know Optometry better than me... it's hard to argue against this point.

In Above arguments it has been aforementioned that there isn't as much opportunity for research. This is completely in accurate. I would argue that there is equal or more opportunity. Instead, Optometry is infact, very research oriented. I know for a fact that every Optometry student to graduate from ICO is required to do an indepth research thesis. In fact, there are many Optometrists at my school (ICO) and other (academic and non-acedemic) institutions abroad that devote 100% of their time to vision research and employ OD's. For example, Dr. David Lee O.D. PhD. (who hasn't seen a refractive patient in more than 10 years) is a world foremost expert on Color Vision, and has been called to counsil many gov'ts abroad to make changes that will ensure better life for Color deficient individuals (4.3% of the population). This is only one of the many. Need I list more to suffice?

And, YES, it is true that in some cases OD's even develop LASER's that they later train Ophthl's to use. For proof, I give you Larry Biatch OD, PhD. Co-Founder and president of American Medical Vision Technologies, which is responsible of the creating of some of the "Ophthl only" LASER's as well as other surgical and ophthalmic devices (I.E. accomadating IOL's). Dr. Baitch, an Optometrist, will, at times instruct Ophthalmologists to use his newly developed instruments, by giving demonstrations. This is just one example of the fact that Optometry is whatever you make it, and another example of an Optometrist that rarely would offer a refractive examination.

NeatoMD is not completely incorrect in saying that OD's can preform surgeries... including LASIK. However, he is, indeed, slightly behind on times if he was refering to OK as his reference for OD's performing LASIK. However, though in a single remote situation I know of, I can tell you that to the best of my knowledge, the Armed Forces of the United State have trained O.D.'s who have performed "special residencies" in OK. These very, very select few can, as a member of the Armed forces perform LASER Insitu Keratometry, or LASIK. After recent legislation, however, no civillian O.D.'s within the US (or elsewhere that I know of) are performing LASIK. For me (and many of my colleagues), I don't really even see the need to, nor do I want to. The $$$ as a bottom line, is the main reason for this. I see all these cut rate clinics performing LASIK at $200 an eye here is Chicago... which doesn't make much sense for what the LASER's cost. Furthermore, with the new Wavefront technology allowing better corrective surgeries than before, the price of LASIK should increase. However, the LASIK market is already saturated.

So many Med students spout off their 2 cents about what Optometrist know (or should know), never having set foot inside an Optometry school. Let me "let the cat out tof the bag," so to speak. Many of the techniques performed in Ophthl are difficult. I can tell you from experience as an Optometrist I could easily operate a YAG LASER, or even an ARGON LASER for AL Trabeculoplasty. Honestly, any ophthal. will tell you that it is a very easy once one can use a Biomicroscope and Gonioscopic lens (basic tests taught to any 2nd year Optometry student). however, the governing factor,or the main reason that Optometrists won't soon be doing these surgeries is a simple problem of supply and demand. I, as an O.D. cannot offset the price of purchasing the above LASER's with the number of patients I will be seeing in the primary care setting. Second of all, Ophthl, remains sufficient to cover the population's needs in this area. This is why OK has OD's performing surgery... a lack of Ophthl. presence. Thus, in this remote setting, it is feasible for an Optometrist to perform such easy task as would require a YAG LASER or ARGON LASER.

That aside, significant advances in technology now allows the Optometrist to do more than ever before. With Beta scanning, Electroretinograms, and the newest arsenol of OCT and GDx (newer retina scanning machines), to name a few, an Optometrist is able offer great treatment options for many patients with a whole host of diseases, including Diabetes, HTN retinopathy, and Glaucoma with the aid of pharmacological devices. Keep in mind that often the Surgical (couterpart) option is often left as a last resort.

In some cases, recent literate is suggesting that premature Surgical Tx has caused excess undue harm to the pt's total health and vision. Case in point, I give you the latest research done at University of Chicago which suggests that early surgical intervention in Diabetic retinopathy actually may cause excess irreversible harm to the pt. compared to if the patient were to otherwise get the disease under control. Again, the latest research is showing that the retina can resolve much of the damages (as per monitoring by an OCT and theraputic pharmacologic intervention as can be provided by either O.D. or M.D. alike in 48 of the 50 states.

So, now, I have provide many facts to many desputed statements. One must chose for him/herself whether or not to come into the light, or continue to fumble in the darkness.

***As a side: I commend those seekers for wishing to get the facts before making judgments. Furthermore, I can't blame MD's for feeling how they do about Optometry. We chose our professions due to a one bias or another... and that's all reflected here, in the above articles. (In other words, post on an Allopathic forum, get an allopathic biased response.)

P.S. (HUNTIN_DOC) I've spent the last two years of Optometry school learning about the Physiology of the entire body. The difference is that we emphasize it's importance as pertains to the eye. In the end, in order to properly treat the diseases of the eye, one needs to know the entire body process. Anyone that says otherwise is a fool.

Hey, I was wondering when CNU would show up. It's neato's alter ego. Search their previous posts... you will find that CNU only posts on these type of threads (ODs vs. MDs). Anyways, more inaccuracies and lies! You should also notice that CNU/neato never use any links or sources... they only use their imagination.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos073.htm
You will see that the government's bureau of labor statistics states that optometrists avg salary was $88k. Also, even the American Optometric Association says the average is $114 (the max being $160k). The thing with the AOA is that their numbers are highly inflated. Just as with any salary survey of this type, the people that make more money are more likely to fill out and send back. The real avg is closer to what the BLS says... a little over $80k.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos073.htm

 

[NEATOMD]

Hey, I was wondering when CNU would show up. It's neato's alter ego. Search their previous posts... you will find that CNU only posts on these type of threads (ODs vs. MDs). Anyways, more inaccuracies and lies! You should also notice that CNU/neato never use any links or sources... they only use their imagination.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos073.htm
You will see that the government's bureau of labor statistics states that optometrists avg salary was $88k. Also, even the American Optometric Association says the average is $114 (the max being $160k). The thing with the AOA is that their numbers are highly inflated. Just as with any salary survey of this type, the people that make more money are more likely to fill out and send back. The real avg is closer to what the BLS says... a little over $80k.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos073.htm

I said I was done, but Bill's lies are just too ridiculous for me to fight the urge.

Billclinton:
1.) Quit trolling.
2.) Get a life. I can't believe you actually have the time to sit around follow posts to see who posts in similar forums as I do. For that matter, CNU is not me and I did not ask/tell him to write the above post. Honestly, I wish he wouldn't have wrote that because I would rather Huntindoc spend the time to find out the truth instead of listening to your (wrong) opinions. I post on MD vs OD threads because its something I know alot about.

I could sit here and come up with conspiracy theory's against Bill, but I don't think I'll stoop to his level.

WTW: I'd be happy to admit I was wrong if I were, but I'm not. I think you should take your own advice.


Since we're living in the US, the tradition is that the prosecution is responsible for providing the proof (not the defendant). Anyway, you want facts, here you go:

I said:
Optometrists can actually make more than MD primary care providers. I was right. Using BillClintons source: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos074.htm#earnings

Over one year in specialty
Internal medicine: General 166,427
Pediatrics: General 161,331
Family practice (w/o ob) 156,010

So, then, what I said was true! If the max reported OCO opt is 166k, and the avg FP makes 156k, then some optometrist somewhere has to be making more than an FP. You might want to go take a general statistics class sometime Bill. You just proved yourself wrong or illiterate...I'm not sure which.

But, wait! Hold on, remember BillClinton claims that such numbers as the ones I reported above "are highly inflated" (see above post for his logic)! Now, using Bill's same logic, then we must be able to assume that the true Family practice (w/o ob) makes an average of ~100k (I extrapolated 114k down to 80 and then used the same method for the Fam Prac. reported 150). If you read the text in Bill's optometry link, you'll see a line that says the following regarding its reporting of optometrists' salaries, "In the long run, however, those in private practice usually earn more." That's a direct quote!

Who's making up stuff Bill? As a matter of fact, the evidence says exactly the opposite of what you claimed above. Apparently, I'm not the one with the overactive imagination

Now, on to the match. Looking at the published stats here: www.nrmp.org/2006advdata.pdf We see, that, just as I stated, only one ophtho program participated in the NRMP match. I was making a point by saying this, realizing it is not the only match out there. And even though the other matches exist, my point still remains: Many more optometrists are getting trained every year than Ophtho's, so by sheer chance that should tell you that more optometrists are probably going to be participating in research. There are about 450 ophtho residencies filled each year http://residency.wustl.edu/medadmin/resweb.nsf/L/51675E1C167DF70186256F8F0073A46C?OpenDocument. Meanwhile accodring to ASCOhttp://www.opted.org/info_profile.cfm about 1300 optometry students graduate each year.

I can't verify the list myself, but CNU's list of accomplish O.D's is more than likely accurate. I'm guessing that he either knows or has met everyone one of those people he listed (Again, just guessing, I don't know that for a fact). But, either way I did a little research.
You can find information on Dr. Baitch here: http://www.amvtlaser.com/about.cfm and if you actually take the time to look up more, you can see that his information is accurate about Dr. Baitch. If you take the time to research the others that he mentioned, you'll most likely find that he is correct about them.

Regarding optometric specialties refer to CNU's post. But for more information about OD research at many different web sites including this one:http://www.opted.org/pdf/optCareerGuide.pdf

About the scope of practice debate from earlier: Are you actually naive and immature enough to believe that any M.D.'s can perform the same practices as any other MD to his own desire? That's so far from the truth, I don't know where to start. However, I can say, that from state to state, laws vary regarding scope of practice.

Going on, lets just use an example to prove original point: Imagine a Dermatologist who "knowing he has the same scope as any other MD" decides to perform Lasik surgery on one of his/her patients.
The surgery would most likely never occur for several reasons. A dermatologist isn't going to have access to the necessary equipt/tools to perform the operation without going through a ophtho. Sure he could buy the equip. but he wouldn't realistically be able to afford to do so.
If he managed to actually perform the surgery without the supervision or permission of an Ophthalmologist and was found out, you can bet that he'd most likely be sued for malpractice and would most likely be dropped from his insurance carrier, would see his future rates increase, would most likely have his priveledges at hospitals suspended, and his license would probably end up under review. Don't believe me, just try and talk your average dermatologist into doing eye surgery and if they don't laugh you out of the room at the thought, they'll definatly think you're medically challenged. Really you can talk to any realistic MD/DO and they'll agree with me.

Fun8stuff: I can legally go to the moon, but if I can't realistically go to the moon, then what's the point in bragging that I can. Even if you have the legal right to perform open heart surgery as an ophtholmologist, if you can't realistically do it, then what's the point in claiming you can?

One more thing: Having the last word and being rude doesn't make you right.

 

[CNU2020]

Seriously Bill... How did you turn this thread into a personal attack?

~~For those just joining us, Bill is known for his ill-tactics in starting fights. Read up on what others have to say about him on his previous forum posts.

Please grow up.

I am not sure where you learned your logic. Just because we post on the same threads doesn't make Neato and I the same person anymore than it makes you a former US president for using his screen name. Did that level of thought really get you into Med school? Here is one of my favorite analogies: If a clock has stopped, it's exactly correct twice a day. If it is behind or ahead, it is never exactly correct. By your form of logic, you would deduce that it's best to have a stopped clock than one that is ahead or behind. The voice of reason will tell you this doesn't make sense in the real world. But logic away.

The explanation remains this: You may recall seeing Neato MD posting that he has a many connections in Optometry. Wouldn't it make sense that I'd back up a friend?? Especially since I have more insight to the situation? I don't know about your friends, but that's what I do for mine.

FYI, NeatoMD is a student at SIU med school. A person can easily validate this fact by private messaging him to request his school addy @siumed.edu (an addy only given to current SIU medical students.)

For your own sake, don't talk about things you don't know about, unless you just want to help prove your own ignorance.

In regard to your comments on Optometric salary:
This is the first stat that comes up when I GOOGLE'd "Optometry Annual Income." <http://www.revoptom.com/index.asp?page=2_718.htm> The site reports that the average private practice Optometrist Grossed $137,000 (in a slump year) for 2002. It is conceded that this information is only from those that report to the Review of Optometry (journal). Nonetheless, with this as proof, my estimate of $135,000 stands. Im not sure how a survey would come up with an average income reported at $88,000. My guess is that you are refering to a starting salary average. The survey also states, "This year’s (2002) highest salary was $630,000 and lowest was $30,000. "

-CNU

 

[Hines302]

The Ohio State University -- College of Optometry I believe recieves the 2nd most funding from the federal goverment for vision research.

 

[billclinton]

neato/cnu,
I think you are the one who needs a class in statistics or maybe a class in reading. You are comparing the avg family doc salary with the max salary reported by optometrists. In case you missed that day in 5th grade where they talked about averages, an average is not the same thing as a max... *******. I stated that AOA's averages are inflated (they say the average is $114k) because the people who make more money are more likely to report. This is common knowledge... think about it for awhile... maybed you will understand.

No one ever disputed that optometrists can't prescribe certain medicines. Do you want to know why they can't prescribe as much as MDs (opthalmologists) and why they are limited to simple eye procedures? It is because they are not as highly trained. End of story.

You posted optometrists could perform Lasik in OK. I just sent you a link from 2006 (from an optometry organization website) that clearly states they cannot do this.

Sure you took classes in physiology and anatomy over the whole body. I did too in undergrad. It doesn't make it equal to the training of an MD. No where close. To treat the diseases of the eye, OPs need to know about the rest of the body true. But guess what.. a physician who treats the whole body has to know a whole lot more. This is why a MD/DO's training is so much more comprehensive.

To sum it up, an optometrist bascically does all the work that an opthamologist does nto want to do. The optometrist is a midlevel practioner who does the pre-operative and post-opertive care. A majority of their time will be spent checking for certain diseases and checking vision. If anything serious arrises- they refer to a MD/DO. End of story.


"They [optometrists] examine people’s eyes to diagnose vision problems and eye diseases, and they test patients’ visual acuity, depth and color perception, and ability to focus and coordinate the eyes. Optometrists prescribe eyeglasses and contact lenses and provide vision therapy and low-vision rehabilitation ... Optometrists often provide preoperative and postoperative care to cataract patients, as well as to patients who have had laser vision correction or other eye surgery. They also diagnose conditions caused by systemic diseases such as diabetes and high blood pressure, referring patients to other health practitioners as needed.

Optometrists should not be confused with ophthalmologists or dispensing opticians. hthalmologists are physicians who perform eye surgery, as well as diagnose and treat eye diseases and injuries. Like optometrists, they also examine eyes and prescribe eyeglasses and contact lenses. Dispensing opticians fit and adjust eyeglasses and, in some States, may fit contact lenses according to prescriptions written by ophthalmologists or optometrists. (See the sections on physicians and surgeons; and opticians, dispensing, elsewhere in the Handbook.)"

 

[CNU2020]

I'm sorry you feel that way. You obviously haven't taken the time to really read our previous post...

Once again, Bill has managed to totally trash a forum. (again, check his previous posts to see what I mean.)

What more can I say? Your history speaks for itself. You're repeated rudeness and ignorances say everything for me. I'm done wasting my time screaming into the darkness. Battling over other people's insecurities is simply not worth my (or anyone's) time. "End of story."

*Some content has been edited from the original*

 

[billclinton]

This isn't really true. You'll find that no matter what field you go into, there will be limits to your care. Saying MD's can do "much more" for their patients is innaccurate. If collectively comparing all MD's to all OD's, it may be true. But every type of doctor is going to have a specific scope of practice that limits them. Some fields have more limits than others. This is true even for specialized docs. A neurosurgeon I know always says, "We spend all our time looking for something treatable, and then when we find one, we refer." Ophthalmologists are in many ways just as limited as any optometrist. You don't see them managing diabetic or heart conditions, removing gallbladders, or putting casts on patients. Same holds true for all doc's: Pulmonologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, EM, ENT...you name it.

Optometry and Ophthalmology are both good fields. Optometrist are actually similar in many ways to pediatricians and family docs. They even get similar pay in many cases. Some optometrist actually make more than MD primary care providers. IE: What you miss often when looking at Optometrist salaries is that many own optical labs that make additional revenue not reported as their "optometrist" income. Optometrists are capable of prescibing orals in many states and some surgical procedures (such as puncal plugs) and in OK, can even perform lasic surgeries. Both are eye specialists. Ophthalmologists do get paid more. Optometrists have much lower insurance rates and this means they have to see less patients to make more money.

*******. perhaps before you accuse someone of reading the posts you should probably think about reading the posts yourself. You guys are really not representing optometry very well. Isn't there a verbal reasoning on the OAT? You think that would be able to screen most you illiterates out.

 

[cpw]

Guys, please keep it civil. You can discuss without calling each other *****s.

If you can't stop flaming the thread will be closed.

No field is better than the other one. MD vs. OD is a PERSONAL decision and you have to make it on your own. I personally am happy doing primary eye care.

Carry on, play nice, and have a great day !

 

[NEATOMD]

Allow me to clarify a few things:

perhaps before you accuse someone of reading the posts you should probably think about reading the posts yourself.

It doesn't appear as though you even proofread your own post.

And you DEFINATELY did not read my (or CNU's) posts well. Read carefully:

You are comparing the avg family doc salary with the max salary reported by optometrists. In case you missed that day in 5th grade where they talked about averages, an average is not the same thing as a max...

Here's what I actually said:

They even get similar pay in many cases. Some optometrist actually make more than MD primary care providers.

Optometrists can actually make more than MD primary care providers...If the max reported OCO opt is 166k, and the avg FP makes 156k, then some optometrist somewhere has to be making more than an FP.

I never said the average optometrist makes more than the average F.P. Not once. I only said that it is possible to make more than some FP's as an OD. And, the evidence supports this claim. You missread what I said.
I never said that the max reported 166k was the average. You appear to have missread again.

I stated that AOA's averages are inflated (they say the average is $114k) because the people who make more money are more likely to report. This is common knowledge... think about it for awhile... maybed you will understand.

Ignoring that you once again failed to proofread, I'd like to point out that I fully understand your point. But, as I said before, this same theory would also apply to MD's because...

the people who make more money are more likely to report. .

This is common knowledge... think about it for awhile... "maybed" YOU will understand

Isn't there a verbal reasoning on the OAT? You think that would be able to screen most you illiterates out.

I wouldn't know, bill. I never took the OAT. Anyway, I think we've already established that I'm not the one with the reading difficulties. But, I did noticed you never PMed me for my email address as CNU2020 suggested:

FYI, NeatoMD is a student at SIU med school. A person can easily validate this fact by private messaging him to request his school addy @siumed.edu (an addy only given to current SIU medical students.)

And, I would think that CNU knows more about optometry than you do since he's an OD student.

I know for a fact that every Optometry student to graduate from ICO is required to do an indepth research thesis. In fact, there are many Optometrists at my school (ICO) and other (academic and non-acedemic) institutions abroad that devote 100% of their time to vision research and employ OD's

But you seem to think you know more about OD schools:

Sure you took classes in physiology and anatomy over the whole body. I did too in undergrad. It doesn't make it equal to the training of an MD. No where close. To treat the diseases of the eye, OPs need to know about the rest of the body true. But guess what.. a physician who treats the whole body has to know a whole lot more. This is why a MD/DO's training is so much more comprehensive.

How do you know it is more comprehensive? Have you taken an OD anatomy or physiology course to compare to your MD one?

As a side point, the anatomy lab in my med school required us to learn fewer specifics than the one I took in undergrad.


Which brings up another point:

Hey, I was wondering when CNU would show up. It's neato's alter ego. Search their previous posts... you will find that CNU only posts on these type of threads (ODs vs. MDs)....
neato/cnu,
I think you are the one who needs a class in statistics or maybe a class in reading.

How could we be the same person if we go to schools 400 miles apart? He lives in Chicago, IL. I live in Carbondale (in Southern Illinois).


Now, before you continue to defame yourself, I'd just like to reiterate what I said earlier:

Having the last word and being rude doesn't make you right.

It only makes you look like the donkey*

 

[davematthews]

I know that "you shouldn't consider money when choosing medicine as a career"... but hey- don't be hipocritical... because you KNOW you are thinking about it to some degree.

Sga814
Well, we know you are anyway.... lol

 

[sstteevvoo]

I am completely unimpressed with almost all of you. I am only 21 years old and have not even finished my bachelor’s degree. It’s crazy to me to see the "professionals" in different fields that I am looking to study be so immature. Seriously you all act like your still in high school.
I read almost all of the different post prior to this and it seems to me that most of you need to get over yourselves and your achievements.
Feel free to hate on me after this because I don’t even think I will be logging on to the sight again.

Thanks

 

[phospho]

I am completely unimpressed with almost all of you. I am only 21 years old and have not even finished my bachelor's degree. It's crazy to me to see the "professionals" in different fields that I am looking to study be so immature. Seriously you all act like your still in high school.
I read almost all of the different post prior to this and it seems to me that most of you need to get over yourselves and your achievements.
Feel free to hate on me after this because I don't even think I will be logging on to the sight again.

Thanks

haha, wtf?

Nobody is going to "hate on you" because nobody cares what happened 4 years ago