DO discrimination

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Is there a problem here?

 

[WDeagle]

On that topic, why the hell are there DO radiology residencies?

Is this a real question? I did not realize DO's were not allowed to be Radiologists.

 

[nicolemsm]

On that topic, why the hell are there DO radiology residencies?

 

[deleted103644]

Is this a real question? I did not realize DO's were not allowed to be Radiologists.

Sure, and there are plenty of ACGME residencies (arguably too many).

How does radiology fit in with OMM and the DO philosophy?

It just doesn't make sense (except as a way to give DO students radiology slots if they can't get an ACGME one).

The programs are also pretty widely panned as being bad, and I believe DO residency grads are already shut out of ACGME fellowships for radiology.

Not trolling, if there is any chance you might be interested in radiology, avoid DO if possible. I saw more international grads than DO students on the interview trail.

 

[WDeagle]

Sure, and there are plenty of ACGME residencies (arguably too many).

How does radiology fit in with OMM and the DO philosophy?

It just doesn't make sense (except as a way to give DO students radiology slots if they can't get an ACGME one).

The programs are also pretty widely panned as being bad, and I believe DO residency grads are already shut out of ACGME fellowships for radiology.

Not trolling, if there is any chance you might be interested in radiology, avoid DO if possible. I saw more international grads than DO students on the interview trail.

Dude you are completely trolling. Are DO's only supposed to go into specialities where you can use OMT all the time? How does any specific speciality fit or not fit with the DO philosophy? So what specialties should I be able to go into according to you? I've really had enough of your troll posts on here. Nobody with that high of a post count is that naive about DOs. Why such a personal vendetta against DOs?

By the way anyone who reads through my previous posts knows that I am extremely critical of OMT and a lot of what the AOA does. I rarely come to the defense of DO's. However, this guy is really being a d-bag here.

On a side not I was surprised at how many of my classmates matched ACGME rads this year. Talking to them it seems like its become much less competitive. Several of my friends with average boards and average class rank were able to match high on their match lists. I think there were a ton of unmatched spots too. So I am gonna disagree with the bolded statement above. In fact, anyone who recommends someone go international over DO for any speciality loses credibility.

 

[pattr]

Sure, and there are plenty of ACGME residencies (arguably too many).

How does radiology fit in with OMM and the DO philosophy?

It just doesn't make sense (except as a way to give DO students radiology slots if they can't get an ACGME one).

The programs are also pretty widely panned as being bad, and I believe DO residency grads are already shut out of ACGME fellowships for radiology.

Not trolling, if there is any chance you might be interested in radiology, avoid DO if possible. I saw more international grads than DO students on the interview trail.

I don't understand why it seems that you are so against there being an AOA match at all.

AOA residencies in general exist b/c they are at hospitals that were historically DO-run (for a long time DO's were shut out of practicing at MD institutions), not because they "fit in with the osteopathic philosophy" or to give less-qualified DO applicants residency positions.

It's just the way it is... the rift between the professions historically is pretty deeply rooted (and understandably so), and past efforts to amalgate the two have failed based on fierce opposition from both sides.

The DO profession has grown as a small sect in medicine and now represents a significant portion of the student population (1 in 5 U.S. medical students) whether you like it or not...

 

[deleted103644]

I did not recommend applying internationally over DO, but even this year they still appeared to have an edge over DO students in radiology admissions (or possibly applied in much greater numbers).

 

[deleted103644]

And whether you like it or not, some hospitals have opened AOA residencies simply because the accreditation guidelines are less stringent.

Obviously not the historically DO institutions, but there are others and these should be avoided.

 

[WDeagle]

And whether you like it or not, some hospitals have opened AOA residencies simply because the accreditation guidelines are less stringent.

Obviously not the historically DO institutions, but there are others and these should be avoided.

Like where? Give me an example I am curious.

 

[WDeagle]

I don't understand why it seems that you are so against there being an AOA match at all.

AOA residencies in general exist b/c they are at hospitals that were historically DO-run (for a long time DO's were shut out of practicing at MD institutions), not because they "fit in with the osteopathic philosophy" or to give less-qualified DO applicants residency positions.

It's just the way it is... the rift between the professions historically is pretty deeply rooted (and understandably so), and past efforts to amalgate the two have failed based on fierce opposition from both sides.

The DO profession has grown as a small sect in medicine and now represents a significant portion of the student population (1 in 5 U.S. medical students) whether you like it or not...

In my experiences I have never seen any sort of rift between and MD's and DO's in actual practice. Most MDs/DOs are too busy worrying about medicare cuts, obamacare, decreased insurance payments, lawsuits, paperwork, aggressive mid-levels, etc to worry about each other. On the contrary I think the 2 professions are more united than ever because of all these threats to the profession that impact them both equally. I think most MD's realize that DO's pose zero threat to them in any way.

The only thing johnnydrama has said that I agree with is that there really doesn't seem to be any need to have two different medical professions. It weakens physicians politically to not be under one umbrella. Although the only people who are really involved with the AOA are the like 7 guys who still practice OMT. Most DO's are more likely to join the AMA although the AMA is a pretty flaccid organization too.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

Nothing you are saying makes sense. When the hell is a DO radiologist or surgeon going to practice OMT? Even if I think OMT is the greatest thing ever there is basically no opportunities and indications for it in most fields. Most physicians are too busy trying get work done to circle-jerk about who looks down on who. If you are an MD and you have time look down on DO's (I have never met one) you need to see more patients.

Everyone else seemed to be able to read my posts just fine... Maybe get your brain checked out?

Had you been reading my posts, you'd realize that I believe that DOs should practice OMM, as that is what sets them apart from MDs. As this conversation has evolved, others have pointed out other differences, but realistically I am still convinced that OMM is the difference between a DO and an MD, especially for a pre-med student deciding which schools to apply to.

Following this logic, in my opinion, it does not make sense for a DO to become a radiologist. Because again, a premed student only applies to DO school because they like OMM, so, if you're bothering to get a degree different than MD, and you're bothering to learn OMM, why go to a field that does not require that knowledge?? It doesn't make sense.

Let's say there are two cooking schools. One teaches cooking, the other teaches baking AND cooking. If you didn't care about baking, why would you go to the baking/cooking school? You wouldn't.

In this idea, I guess I would prefer not to see a DO radiologist or surgeon, as it literally makes no sense to me that a DO to go in a field that makes them indistinguishable from an MD.

DOs and MDs are different, I don't know why everyone is so adamant about making them the same. I also don't know why you always come to the same assumption that everyone thinks DOs are worse. I've never said that yet people keep implying it, maybe you have an inferiority complex, and just assume people look down on you.

 

[skinnyDO]

Haha I can't believe this guy spends so much time and energy.. It's quite pathetic actually.


And shame on the rest of you for even arguing with such nonsense.


Do you think ANYONE in the realm of healthcare (besides sdn premeds) gives a crap about what you think about DOs?? Haha it's as if your opinion actually matters or something 😛


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[skinnyDO]

DOs can become radiologists and surgeons because that is what the health care system in America has deemed appropriate. Do you see how insignificant your opinion is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SpecterGT260]

Haha I can't believe this guy spends so much time and energy.. It's quite pathetic actually.


And shame on the rest of you for even arguing with such nonsense.


Do you think ANYONE in the realm of healthcare (besides sdn premeds) gives a crap about what you think about DOs?? Haha it's as if your opinion actually matters or something 😛


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quick, do we have one of those fancy Latin phrases for swinging a double edged sword?

 

[skinnyDO]

Quick, do we have one of those fancy Latin phrases for swinging a double edged sword?

Haha it's so easy to get sucked into these things... I digress now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

Haha I can't believe this guy spends so much time and energy.. It's quite pathetic actually.


And shame on the rest of you for even arguing with such nonsense.


Do you think ANYONE in the realm of healthcare (besides sdn premeds) gives a crap about what you think about DOs?? Haha it's as if your opinion actually matters or something 😛


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

DOs can become radiologists and surgeons because that is what the health care system in America has deemed appropriate. Do you see how insignificant your opinion is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dooooooo, everyone's opinion is insignificant!! That doesn't mean you shouldn't have one!

The American healthcare system has deemed abortions appropriate too, but as a word of advice from someone who doesn't matter: don't go tell that to pro-lifers.

🙂

 

[skinnyDO]

Touché! I have underestimated you. 😉


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sileni]

Everyone else seemed to be able to read my posts just fine... Maybe get your brain checked out?

Had you been reading my posts, you'd realize that I believe that DOs should practice OMM, as that is what sets them apart from MDs. As this conversation has evolved, others have pointed out other differences, but realistically I am still convinced that OMM is the difference between a DO and an MD, especially for a pre-med student deciding which schools to apply to.

Following this logic, in my opinion, it does not make sense for a DO to become a radiologist. Because again, a premed student only applies to DO school because they like OMM, so, if you're bothering to get a degree different than MD, and you're bothering to learn OMM, why go to a field that does not require that knowledge?? It doesn't make sense.

Let's say there are two cooking schools. One teaches cooking, the other teaches baking AND cooking. If you didn't care about baking, why would you go to the baking/cooking school? You wouldn't.

In this idea, I guess I would prefer not to see a DO radiologist or surgeon, as it literally makes no sense to me that a DO to go in a field that makes them indistinguishable from an MD.

DOs and MDs are different, I don't know why everyone is so adamant about making them the same. I also don't know why you always come to the same assumption that everyone thinks DOs are worse. I've never said that yet people keep implying it, maybe you have an inferiority complex, and just assume people look down on you.

I think I know what answer you're looking for, and I'm going to bite so you can stop dancing around the bush.

People don't just apply to DO schools because they're interested in OMM, a large percentage apply because they're perfectly good applicants to MD programs, but because of the sheer volume of MD applicants and the low number of slots, they apply to DO programs as well as they both train the student to become a physician.

Historically, OMM was practiced by DOs because at the time many treatments involved what A.T. Still believe to be dangerous medications (like As, Hg, etc.) He also had a belief the body has an ability to heal itself and through manual stimulation one can encourage the process. While we know, today, that some of Still's philosophy was questionable.

OMM is retained at DO instutitions because they believe it still has some uses in contemporary medicine, and while that's up for debate by both the MD and DO communities, one can't deny the place that it has in the history of osteopathic medicine.

Moral of the story, very few people go to DO school for the philosophy (some do, but I would wager most don't), they go because of the sheer volume of applicants to MD schools is so high that not all "worthy" students can go into an MD program so they instead go to a DO program, which educates it's students just as well as any MD program would.

DO schools are a path to becoming a physician, the same as going to any MD school is, just because you go to a DO school doesn't mean your obligated in any way to practice OMM. I know a medical school here in michigan that offers a Medical Humanities course instead of Nutritiion (that we take here at Wayne State), does that mean that students who elect to attend MSUCHM are required to become artists or write medical-related literature?

 

[Wolverines83]

I think I know what answer you're looking for, and I'm going to bite so you can stop dancing around the bush.

People don't just apply to DO schools because they're interested in OMM, a large percentage apply because they're perfectly good applicants to MD programs, but because of the sheer volume of MD applicants and the low number of slots, they apply to DO programs as well as they both train the student to become a physician.

Historically, OMM was practiced by DOs because at the time many treatments involved what A.T. Still believe to be dangerous medications (like As, Hg, etc.) He also had a belief the body has an ability to heal itself and through manual stimulation one can encourage the process. While we know, today, that some of Still's philosophy was questionable.

OMM is retained at DO instutitions because they believe it still has some uses in contemporary medicine, and while that's up for debate by both the MD and DO communities, one can't deny the place that it has in the history of osteopathic medicine.

Moral of the story, very few people go to DO school for the philosophy (some do, but I would wager most don't), they go because of the sheer volume of applicants to MD schools is so high that not all "worthy" students can go into an MD program so they instead go to a DO program, which educates it's students just as well as any MD program would.

DO schools are a path to becoming a physician, the same as going to any MD school is, just because you go to a DO school doesn't mean your obligated in any way to practice OMM. I know a medical school here in michigan that offers a Medical Humanities course instead of Nutritiion (that we take here at Wayne State), does that mean that students who elect to attend MSUCHM are required to become artists or write medical-related literature?

Oromaxopodo...whatever your name is, I don't want to look it up. Look at the bolded sentence here. That's the truth.

You overestimate the importance of OMM, plain and simple. I'm at a DO school and I almost forget about my OMM exams until like the day before. Cram...exam...expunge...repeat. Seriously. It is a stand alone class that, quite frankly, isn't integrated into the other classes really at all.

You can agree or disagree with that but the truth is OMM isn't nearly as big a part as you think it is. You wouldn't know this because you're not in a DO school, so no one is blaming you for not knowing. But being unable to alter your viewpoint in the face of factual information is kinda weak, don't you think?

The DO and MD are different b/c of politics, plain and simple. At this point t's a DDS/DMD deal.

I really wish I could walk away from this thread but I can't look away. It's like a bad car accident or something.....

 

[deleted103644]

The DO and MD are different b/c of politics, plain and simple. At this point t's a DDS/DMD deal.

I really wish I could walk away from this thread but I can't look away. It's like a bad car accident or something.....

DMD/DDS is actually a completely different story. Harvard only issues diplomas in Latin and they unilaterally decided that CDD (the Latin for DDS) looked dumb, so they started issuing DMDs. Other schools followed their lead.

With DDS/DMD, there was never any difference in approach to training.

Osteopathic medicine originally did not accept the use of medications and believed all ills could be treated with physical manipulation. When patients stopped being willing to see doctors who would not prescribe medications, DOs decided they needed to switch.

Naturopathic doctors already give people most of the same courses as medical school plus some random gibberish. Should we give them full licensing rights as well if they just conform a bit more?

DO/MD is a completely different beast than DDS/DMD.

Unless you are willing to publicly denounce AT Still and all of his theories and get them completely removed from your required curriculum, the entire foundation of your degree is still suspect.

I have nothing against people using DO as a backdoor to becoming physicians, in fact I respect them more than those who buy the BS. But I think that they have a duty to fight to get rid of the bologna in their curriculum. It's in their own best interests.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Naturopathic doctors already give people most of the same courses as medical school plus some random gibberish. Should we give them full licensing rights as well if they just conform a bit more?
.

in the name of all that is good and holy, no.

here is the simple reason why (and this will likely fan jonny's flame a little)
The fundamental beliefs of naturopaths is not just unproven, but very often in direct contradiction to proper scientific principles. These people, while possibly being exposed to the same material, cannot possibly understand it to the same degree as a real physician. If they did, there is simply no way to also hold their more quirky beliefs. I've said it before, but the people in ND programs are just ever so slightly on the proper side of shortbus. It is infuriating/tragic that ND is even a thing, and the only reason it is is because modern medicine has done such a fantastic job of making people healthy enough to be so reckless with their care.

ND:MD :: JiffyLube : Dealer certified Service Center

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I did not recommend applying internationally over DO, but even this year they still appeared to have an edge over DO students in radiology admissions (or possibly applied in much greater numbers).

You're not considering the AOA match, which is something that over 70% of DO's match into and who knows how many participate. So for example the chance of you getting into orthopedic surgery with the AOA match is about the same as a DO as if you were an MD. But regardless the only residencies that the boards won't like are DO anes or a few really uncompetitive ones, and since Gas is not a holy mountain to climb it's a non-issue.

Anyway HockyDoc has a spreadsheet on this topic.

 

[Wolverines83]

DMD/DDS is actually a completely different story. Harvard only issues diplomas in Latin and they unilaterally decided that CDD (the Latin for DDS) looked dumb, so they started issuing DMDs. Other schools followed their lead.

With DDS/DMD, there was never any difference in approach to training.

Osteopathic medicine originally did not accept the use of medications and believed all ills could be treated with physical manipulation. When patients stopped being willing to see doctors who would not prescribe medications, DOs decided they needed to switch.

Naturopathic doctors already give people most of the same courses as medical school plus some random gibberish. Should we give them full licensing rights as well if they just conform a bit more?

DO/MD is a completely different beast than DDS/DMD.

Unless you are willing to publicly denounce AT Still and all of his theories and get them completely removed from your required curriculum, the entire foundation of your degree is still suspect.

I have nothing against people using DO as a backdoor to becoming physicians, in fact I respect them more than those who buy the BS. But I think that they have a duty to fight to get rid of the bologna in their curriculum. It's in their own best interests.

I make it a habit not to respond to you because I know that's what keeps you going but oh well.

3 bolded portion:

1) Originally...as in not anymore
2) Medications...mercury injections? blood letting?
3) Can you read the minds and motivations of past patients from 100 years ago? That's awesome. It was when modern science became part of modern medicine.

If we're going to judge medicine based on the days when the DO degree was being formed we need to realize all medicine (MD/DO/other) was ridiculous.

 

[SpecterGT260]

the problem with your response to johnny is that the MDs changed. DOs have not. Whether or not you agree with him, this is exactly what he has been arguing.

 

[Sileni]

I have nothing against people using DO as a backdoor to becoming physicians...

Yeah... That statement right there is pretty loaded... I'm suspecting troll.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

DMD/DDS is actually a completely different story. Harvard only issues diplomas in Latin and they unilaterally decided that CDD (the Latin for DDS) looked dumb, so they started issuing DMDs. Other schools followed their lead.

With DDS/DMD, there was never any difference in approach to training.

Osteopathic medicine originally did not accept the use of medications and believed all ills could be treated with physical manipulation. When patients stopped being willing to see doctors who would not prescribe medications, DOs decided they needed to switch.

Naturopathic doctors already give people most of the same courses as medical school plus some random gibberish. Should we give them full licensing rights as well if they just conform a bit more?

DO/MD is a completely different beast than DDS/DMD.

Unless you are willing to publicly denounce AT Still and all of his theories and get them completely removed from your required curriculum, the entire foundation of your degree is still suspect.

I have nothing against people using DO as a backdoor to becoming physicians, in fact I respect them more than those who buy the BS. But I think that they have a duty to fight to get rid of the bologna in their curriculum. It's in their own best interests.

That's a strawman if not boarding on being a complete non-sequitor. How does teaching for 200 hours potentially affect the validity of the teaching of gastroenterology and neurology, who's courses are basically standardized between all colleges?
Honestly, your setting on this extreme ultimatums for standards that somehow make sense in your head is really just laughable. You're honestly more self-justified than an autocrine cancer cell....

 

[deleted103644]

You're not considering the AOA match, which is something that over 70% of DO's match into and who knows how many participate. So for example the chance of you getting into orthopedic surgery with the AOA match is about the same as a DO as if you were an MD. But regardless the only residencies that the boards won't like are DO anes or a few really uncompetitive ones, and since Gas is not a holy mountain to climb it's a non-issue.

Anyway HockyDoc has a spreadsheet on this topic.

There are only ~34 spots for radiology in the DO match, and the caliber of the programs is really low. The Michigan programs are probably just a couple steps below their community equivalents, but the rest are really bad.

Most have low volume, and even one with high volume like St Barnabas in the Bronx has severe limitations (also one of the worst hospitals in NYC). It is a step below the Harlem Hospital and Bronx Lebanon residencies (two of the worst ACGME radiology residencies, to the point both were on probation prior to Bronx Lebanon shutting its program down).

Outside of primary care and Michigan, I'd be really wary of a DO residency, although admittedly I have not looked into other specialties as deeply as radiology.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

the problem with your response to johnny is that the MDs changed. DOs have not. Whether or not you agree with him, this is exactly what he has been arguing.

DO has changed as well, while I agree that OMM should generally be removed. I don't really think that having a seminar or two to see a little of it's cultural history and significance to DO schools and maybe retaining a few therapeutic techniques is too horrible. A gradual movement towards unifying the degrees is a lot better than trying to forcefully combine them and pissing off everyone.

 

[Wolverines83]

the problem with your response to johnny is that the MDs changed. DOs have not. Whether or not you agree with him, this is exactly what he has been arguing.

I disagree with that. DOs have changed from the days of OMM cures everything just as MDs have changed from the days of bloodletting. Modern medicine is incomparable to those days.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

There are only ~34 spots for radiology in the DO match, and the caliber of the programs is really low. The Michigan programs are probably just a couple steps below their community equivalents, but the rest are really bad.

Most have low volume, and even one with high volume like St Barnabas in the Bronx has severe limitations (also one of the worst hospitals in NYC). It is a step below the Harlem Hospital and Bronx Lebanon residencies (two of the worst ACGME radiology residencies, to the point both were on probation prior to Bronx Lebanon shutting its program down).

Outside of primary care and Michigan, I'd be really wary of a DO residency, although admittedly I have not looked into other specialties as deeply as radiology.

Eh, plenty of practicing DO's in a lot of surgical subspecalties that are apparently doing fine.

 

[SpecterGT260]

DO has changed as well, while I agree that OMM should generally be removed. I don't really think that having a seminar or two to see a little of it's cultural history and significance to DO schools and maybe retaining a few therapeutic techniques is too horrible. A gradual movement towards unifying the degrees is a lot better than trying to forcefully combine them and pissing off everyone.

I disagree with that. DOs have changed from the days of OMM cures everything just as MDs have changed from the days of bloodletting. Modern medicine is incomparable to those days.

The only point I was trying to make is that stubbornly holding on to practices which are not supported mechanistically by science (like cranial) looks bad. What looks worse is the AOAs attempts at publishing data to validate these techniques instead of abandoning them.

It would be like JAMA publishing the hemochromatosis success stories in an attempt to validate blood letting.

Why hang on to something that damages your credibility when all you have to do is just let it go/stop it to remove the damage in the first place. You can argue that it doesnt significantly damage, but who cares.... The "cure" is not to DO something, but to STOP something - that takes exactly zero effort.

 

[deleted103644]

Eh, plenty of practicing DO's in a lot of surgical subspecalties that are apparently doing fine.

As I said, mainly familiar with the radiology programs and those should be avoided.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

The only point I was trying to make is that stubbornly holding on to practices which are not supported mechanistically by science (like cranial) looks bad. What looks worse is the AOAs attempts at publishing data to validate these techniques instead of abandoning them.

It would be like JAMA publishing the hemochromatosis success stories in an attempt to validate blood letting.

Why hang on to something that damages your credibility when all you have to do is just let it go/stop it to remove the damage in the first place. You can argue that it doesnt significantly damage, but who cares.... The "cure" is not to DO something, but to STOP something - that takes exactly zero effort.

Maybe if it was a single person it would take zero effort to spot. However it's not and it's akin to playing the telephone game with the AOA, in which the real demands of DO's doesn't reach them. Point is that it's going to be a lot easier to just gradually move into it than to go to a grinding stop and then have the stop felt throughout the entire hierarchy.

 

[SpecterGT260]

That's a strawman if not boarding on being a complete non-sequitor. How does teaching for 200 hours potentially affect the validity of the teaching of gastroenterology and neurology, who's courses are basically standardized between all colleges?
Honestly, your setting on this extreme ultimatums for standards that somehow make sense in your head is really just laughable. You're honestly more self-justified than an autocrine cancer cell....

go back and read the thing I said about NDs

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

As I said, mainly familiar with the radiology programs and those should be avoided.

Alright go on. I have absolutely no idea what radiology training entails other than looking at a bunch of films. What are these AOA programs doing wrong?

 

[SpecterGT260]

Maybe if it was a single person it would take zero effort to spot. However it's not and it's akin to playing the telephone game with the AOA, in which the real demands of DO's doesn't reach them. Point is that it's going to be a lot easier to just gradually move into it than to go to a grinding stop and then have the stop felt throughout the entire hierarchy.

I disagree. Maybe you are right practically, that it is difficult to reach the AOA elites so such things won't simply happen. But I wasnt talking about going through the channels. I was addressing the comment at the level of the AOA - there is no excuse for them. They cant say it will be too difficult to implement. Its as simple as no longer requiring it in OMM training and removing the related qustions from COMLEX. Done and done.

 

[Wolverines83]

The only point I was trying to make is that stubbornly holding on to practices which are not supported mechanistically by science (like cranial) looks bad. What looks worse is the AOAs attempts at publishing data to validate these techniques instead of abandoning them.

It would be like JAMA publishing the hemochromatosis success stories in an attempt to validate blood letting.

Why hang on to something that damages your credibility when all you have to do is just let it go/stop it to remove the damage in the first place. You can argue that it doesnt significantly damage, but who cares.... The "cure" is not to DO something, but to STOP something - that takes exactly zero effort.

Yeah I hear you there. One major issue with the DO community is that the AOA doesn't really represent the DO physicians effectively. While the AOA makes statements like that, most DOs are like "cranial? really? siiigghhh." We know that discredits us and actually, are all in agreement that that **** needs to change. When we're in a position to change it, we will. Until then, we'll humor our teacher in order to pass the exam.

 

[deleted103644]

Yeah... That statement right there is pretty loaded... I'm suspecting troll.

Not a troll, find DO/MD debates tiresome.

Pseudoscience just makes me angry, and anything that provides support for it deserves derision.

And my statement was accurate if blunt - at least half of your class if not 75-90% will be in your DO program because they want to be physicians but didn't have the stats for an MD program in their preferred regions. I know it's a point of sensitivity for many DO students, but I'm not trying to press buttons, just stating facts.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

go back and read the thing I said about NDs

The argument doesn't hold water here, DO's are not taught the material in a different paradigm or towards a how can we use OMM to cure everything perspective. DO's are taught in one class how to use OMM and how it was believed to work, it likely has little to do with the other real classes. ND's however while doubtfully learn the same material will have a spin put on it in a pro-ND paradigm, simply untrue in DO schools.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Not a troll, find DO/MD debates tiresome.

Pseudoscience just makes me angry, and anything that provides support for it deserves derision.

And my statement was accurate if blunt - at least half of your class if not 75-90% will be in your DO program because they want to be physicians but didn't have the stats for an MD program in their preferred regions. I know it's a point of sensitivity for many DO students, but I'm not trying to press buttons, just stating facts.

Well that or weren't lucky. Honestly a good part of the MD application now a days is luck.

 

[SpecterGT260]

The argument doesn't hold water here, DO's are not taught the material in a different paradigm or towards a how can we use OMM to cure everything perspective. DO's are taught in one class how to use OMM and how it was believed to work, it likely has little to do with the other real classes. ND's however while doubtfully learn the same material will have a spin put on it in a pro-ND paradigm, simply untrue in DO schools.

I understand, and I am not as anti-DO or anti-OMM as my counterpart jonathan here.....

But you have to admit, even if strawman.... how seriously do you take someone's "expertise" if they also push something completely insane?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I understand, and I am not as anti-DO or anti-OMM as my counterpart jonathan here.....

But you have to admit, even if strawman.... how seriously do you take someone's "expertise" if they also push something completely insane?

Well thankfully most don't. Obviously you have 5% that are crazy and believe in Cranial curing autism, but it's not the majority. However the maybe 10% of other DO's who use it in FM practices probably use it for things like muscle tension or for things like that, nothing too insane. The other 85% simply do not use it at all.

 

[deleted103644]

Well that or weren't lucky. Honestly a good part of the MD application now a days is luck.

That's true. Your odds improve with better stats, but you're absolutely correct.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Well thankfully most don't. Obviously you have 5% that are crazy and believe in Cranial curing autism, but it's not the majority.

right. so go a little further here.
The ideas that support that belief are not only unsupported, but are in direct contradiction to what we know from basic sciences like gross anatomy and phys. So that person who believes in it... how confident are you that they truly understand the principles upon which medicine is built? This person has very likely memorized a few factoids to pass boards and otherwise has very little understanding. This person is also likely to continue to employ other such sham treatments based on this lack of understanding to, potentially, the peril of the patients
(alliteration is fun 🙂)

 

[Darkskies]

I'm somewhat baffled that many of the DO students who have responded in this thread are gladly advocating that the two degrees are amalgamated and that the teaching of OMM should be reduced at schools. In addition, many have bashed the AOA and osteopathic schools for remaining distinct from their MD counterparts.

Newsflash: If there were no DO stigma and all current DO schools began handing out MD degrees, a large percentage of you would not be in medical school since the stats for incoming students to these schools and programs would immediately jump(since everyone and their mom are clamoring to apply to MD programs). Why bash the profession that allows/allowed you to be doctors?

 

[Sileni]

Not a troll, find DO/MD debates tiresome.

Pseudoscience just makes me angry, and anything that provides support for it deserves derision.

And my statement was accurate if blunt - at least half of your class if not 75-90% will be in your DO program because they want to be physicians but didn't have the stats for an MD program in their preferred regions. I know it's a point of sensitivity for many DO students, but I'm not trying to press buttons, just stating facts.

1) I'm a US MD student.

2) No one is arguing that point, but calling DO a backdoor into medicine and your critcisism of DOs as, frankly, inferior is either you trolling, or you really are that egotistical.

 

[deleted103644]

1) I'm a US MD student.

2) No one is arguing that point, but calling DO a backdoor into medicine and your critcisism of DOs as, frankly, inferior is either you trolling, or you really are that egotistical.

My criticism of the DO degree is for its support of pseudoscience and the fact that it was originated by a quack.

The DO degree for many is an alternative pathway aka backdoor to becoming a physician for many. It's essentially listed that way in the NRMP results table, so this isn't exactly a controversial position.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

I'm somewhat baffled that many of the DO students who have responded in this thread are gladly advocating that the two degrees are amalgamated and that the teaching of OMM should be reduced at schools. In addition, many have bashed the AOA and osteopathic schools for remaining distinct from their MD counterparts.

Newsflash: If there were no DO stigma and all current DO schools began handing out MD degrees, a large percentage of you would not be in medical school since the stats for incoming students to these schools and programs would immediately jump(since everyone and their mom are clamoring to apply to MD programs). Why bash the profession that allows/allowed you to be doctors?

I agree with your first paragraph, but not your second paragraph.

Admissions might go up a little, but probably not a lot. The "I want to be a doctor" applicant pool numbers won't change really, and I imagine the number of people wanting to be docs that would rather not go to medical school than DO school is small.

 

[Sileni]

My criticism of the DO degree is for its support of pseudoscience and the fact that it was originated by a quack.

The DO degree for many is an alternative pathway aka backdoor to becoming a physician for many. It's essentially listed that way in the NRMP results table, so this isn't exactly a controversial position.

1) You're calling the originator a quack because we know now a portion of his philosophy has been debunked. But truthfully, most doctors (if not all) back at his same time would also be "quacks". In fact, I'm certain 100 years from now we'll be considered quacks. Think about it, "in the early 2000s they used to give cancer patients copious amounts of poisions and just hoped it worked".

2) The DO degree is an alternative pathway, yes, but backdoor implies it's sneaky or underhanded. DOs get the same license, and practice the same exact medicine. Many take the same exams (the USMLE) or the comparable exam (COMLEX). There's nothing sneaky about this.