DO schools should become MD

[halekulani]

---

Members do not see this ad.

If DO schools become MD schools, then where will all the MD rejects apply?

ibanking duh.

 

[Trogghunter]

To address a previous post...nerve pinches can be alleviated by a manipulation...it's really not an 'unproven' technique. I encountered this while volunteering at an ER for the past 3 years...it's a common occurrence. ie, vertebrae often cause nerve pinches that cause pain/numbness.

Also, a lot of people say that osteopathic medicine focuses on 'preventative medicine'...well, I think that any physician or any health care practitioner should be educating his patient in living a healthier life...or 'preventing' unhealthy habits. Just think about this: the most prevalent diseases in America are preventable...or at least the morbidity could be severely decreased: diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, several forms of cancer (lung- cough, cough) to name a few. shouldnt everyone be practicing some form of 'preventative' medicine? Then you have the challenge of patient cooperation...a patient will gladly take a pill but will never seem to change a habit. Just think of all of the burden of our healthcare that could be lifted with 'preventative' medicine?

 

[softmed]

To address a previous post...nerve pinches can be alleviated by a manipulation...it's really not an 'unproven' technique. I encountered this while volunteering at an ER for the past 3 years...it's a common occurrence. ie, vertebrae often cause nerve pinches that cause pain/numbness.

Also, a lot of people say that osteopathic medicine focuses on 'preventative medicine'...well, I think that any physician or any health care practitioner should be educating his patient in living a healthier life...or 'preventing' unhealthy habits. Just think about this: the most prevalent diseases in America are preventable...or at least the morbidity could be severely decreased: diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, several forms of cancer (lung- cough, cough) to name a few. shouldnt everyone be practicing some form of 'preventative' medicine? Then you have the challenge of patient cooperation...a patient will gladly take a pill but will never seem to change a habit. Just think of all of the burden of our healthcare that could be lifted with 'preventative' medicine?

But again, this isn't that much of a difference. There are plenty of MDs concerned with prevention. The simple fact is, the training is so similar that it doesn't warrant a different pair of letters next to your name. At best, DO schools have about the same variation in philosophy as an individual medical school varies from another.

 

[softmed]

I did read the whole article, and many more besides. 😉

What I didn't know was the relative ease about getting the practice rights because I have heard of DOs not getting the rights they clearly deserve. They could still work in medicine but were not physicians.

Thanks for the info! 🙂

I would not take my word for it. I have absolutely no experience in the matter and I really don't know that much about it. I'm just going by the chart in the wikipedia entry. Some countries do not recognize American DO at all, but it looks like most of them will accept DO if you take a test or get a letter. That sounds easy enough, but I do not know how simple it is in practice.

 

[CatchingUp]

But if you're pre-Allo why does it matter to you?

 

[chiz2kul]

damn.. you are one slow kid..
its proven to have a effect
a doctor invented it when medicine caused more problems in good because most were based off harmful chemicals

omm is based off the fact that you can help guide the body in its natural repair
frankly a DO saved the life of my friend who was sufficating due to a near diaphram collapse by using omm he caused the lungs to expand and relased pressure upon them causing them to release
he saved her until the paramedics came

if you too flipping dumb to realize that omm works
i'd like you to please leave SDN now

im done talking with you on this topic
im tired of hearing your *****ic dribble and idiocracy
your just so bitter about you being afraid of not getting your M.D
get
over
it
go to the caribbean
if you dont believe in omm, the DO schools dont and will never want you

hahahaha that makes no sense whatsoever. Try again.

 

[softmed]

hahahaha that makes no sense whatsoever. Try again.

" medicine caused more problems in good because most were based off harmful chemicals"

^^^That part is actually correct. Osteopathy was much better than the random chemicals doctors would prescribe back in the day.

 

[softmed]

But if you're pre-Allo why does it matter to you?

I am applying to DO schools as well, but I still haven't finished my secondaries so it's unlikely I'll be accepted.

 

[Trogghunter]

But again, this isn't that much of a difference. There are plenty of MDs concerned with prevention. The simple fact is, the training is so similar that it doesn't warrant a different pair of letters next to your name. At best, DO schools have about the same variation in philosophy as an individual medical school varies from another.

Yeah, that's exactly what the osteopathic and allopathic physicians that I shadowed said....my premed adviser said that as well. Apparently it was a bigger deal with the older MDs back in the day when they thought that thallamide was a great remedy for morning sickness.

 

[CatchingUp]

I am applying to DO schools as well, but I still haven't finished my secondaries so it's unlikely I'll be accepted.

Which makes no sense since you claim OMM is "unproven" and "nonsense"...why even waste your time?

 

[softmed]

Yeah, that's exactly what the osteopathic and allopathic physicians that I shadowed said....my premed adviser said that as well. Apparently it was a bigger deal with the older MDs back in the day when they thought that thallamide was a great remedy for morning sickness.

Well, it IS a great remedy for morning sickness. It was just never scientifically tested on pregnant women. Luckily the FDA never approved it for that use in America.

 

[Longshanks]

"In the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, “osteopaths" are trained in osteopathic principles and osteopathic manipulative treatment but are not physicians."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor...e#International_variations_in_the_D.O._degree

Can anyone cite a source outside of the possibly sketchy Wikipedia that confirms or disproves this?

It wigged me out big time, because I will probably eventually move overseas for a decade or so with my husband and eventual kids to one of those countries... and because of that, I was afraid to apply to any DO schools for fear of losing my physician status and thus, job.

I don't mean this as instigating anything... I'm genuinely curious, and hope that the above isn't accurate.

Anyone know anything? 🙂

That is a semantic issue. "Osteopaths" in Europe are not the same as "Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine" in America. You can get practicing rights as an American trained DO in many foreign countries.

 

[Longshanks]

That's rather ironic since your MDApps seems to support my statement

Nice. Glad you treat your future colleagues with such respect. Did mommy tell you you were the best med student ever to grace this fine earth? You must be so proud of yourself.

 

[FIREitUP]

you are arguing on the internet by the way. just wanted to put that out there...

 

[Ativanigans]

Nice. Glad you treat your future colleagues with such respect. Did mommy tell you you were the best med student ever to grace this fine earth? You must be so proud of yourself.

I dont know why people are so unwilling to say this. The majority of MD applicants view DO as a backup option, in case things dont work out. Do DO's make good doctors? Sure, they're perfectly competent. But that doesnt mean DO schools aren't viewed as a plan B for most people who are also applying to MD programs. This doesn't speak to the quality of the schools themselves, only the strength of the applicants applying.

 

[mmmcdowe]

See my avatar please.

 

[FIREitUP]

See my avatar please.

i think you are wrong.

 

[Slowpoke]

I dont know why people are so unwilling to say this. The majority of MD applicants view DO as a backup option, in case things dont work out. Do DO's make good doctors? Sure, they're perfectly competent. But that doesnt mean DO schools aren't viewed as a plan B for most people who are also applying to MD programs. This doesn't speak to the quality of the schools themselves, only the strength of the applicants applying.

It's not always the case that DO is plan B. Sometimes people just legitimately want to take the DO route for various reasons and its those individuals who are the ones that have every right to get mad when people say MD > DO.

 

[beckhunter116]

I dont know why people are so unwilling to say this. The majority of MD applicants view DO as a backup option, in case things dont work out. Do DO's make good doctors? Sure, they're perfectly competent. But that doesnt mean DO schools aren't viewed as a plan B for most people who are also applying to MD programs. This doesn't speak to the quality of the schools themselves, only the strength of the applicants applying.

I would say that a good majority of the non-trad applicants only apply to DO (I am). The fact is that MD schools really do focus mostly on numbers and very rarely look beyond that. It's fine, I totally understand that each school gets thousands of applications from people who have never struggled with an issue. I'm not saying that they didn't work hard; unfortunately, life hits hard sometimes and my earlier grades reflect me adjusting. It took sometime to adjust but those struggles are how I know I have the strength to do this profession (among other things).

I'm not saying any of that so that this thread will turn into a huge pity story over who had it the hardest and still got a 4.0 and 35+ on the MCAT.

Is OMT the end all to be all...no. I've seen it be helpful and I've seen it do nothing. Again, that's life. I'll gladly learn OMT so that I can treat patients. At the end of the day the letters behind my name mean very little to me, if they mean more to you that's fine--I have better things to think about. No one is forcing anyone to apply to DO as a back-up. Apply to Ross, SGU, or any other offshore school you choose. Keep applying to US MD schools, again I have better things to think about.

 

[cubssox2000]

omm is based off the fact that you can help guide the body in its natural repair
frankly a DO saved the life of my friend who was sufficating due to a near diaphram collapse by using omm he caused the lungs to expand and relased pressure upon them causing them to release
he saved her until the paramedics came

While I am glad that your friend was able to get help, this is not something that is specifically DO oriented.

The lungs can't expand on their own, so they need muscles to move them, this means that the DO who helped your friend did not "cause the lungs to expand", he just used different muscles to expand the rib cage, which in turn expands the lungs. The diaphragm is your primary inspiratory muscle, and if it gets injured, you will have trouble breathing. However, there are secondary muscles - the intercostals and sternocleidomastoid - that can lift the rib cage and inflate the lung. If a person can't use their diaphragm, a possible short term treatment would be using these secondary muscles. This is accomplished by telling the person to breath as though they were running, which will use mainly these secondary muscles. Of course, once at a hospital, the doctors will try to get the diaphragm working again.

This is just basic knowledge of the muscle systems and how they work, not necessarily OMM.

 

[mmmcdowe]

I would say that a good majority of the non-trad applicants only apply to DO (I am). The fact is that MD schools really do focus mostly on numbers and very rarely look beyond that. It's fine, I totally understand that each school gets thousands of applications from people who have never struggled with an issue. I'm not saying that they didn't work hard; unfortunately, life hits hard sometimes and my earlier grades reflect me adjusting. It took sometime to adjust but those struggles are how I know I have the strength to do this profession (among other things).

I'm not saying any of that so that this thread will turn into a huge pity story over who had it the hardest and still got a 4.0 and 35+ on the MCAT.

Is OMT the end all to be all...no. I've seen it be helpful and I've seen it do nothing. Again, that's life. I'll gladly learn OMT so that I can treat patients. At the end of the day the letters behind my name mean very little to me, if they mean more to you that's fine--I have better things to think about. No one is forcing anyone to apply to DO as a back-up. Apply to Ross, SGU, or any other offshore school you choose. Keep applying to US MD schools, again I have better things to think about.

Half of the students at the top 10 are non trad.

 

[voitokas]

I dont know why people are so unwilling to say this. The majority of MD applicants view DO as a backup option, in case things dont work out. Do DO's make good doctors? Sure, they're perfectly competent. But that doesnt mean DO schools aren't viewed as a plan B for most people who are also applying to MD programs. This doesn't speak to the quality of the schools themselves, only the strength of the applicants applying.

You mean the "numbers" strength of the applicant. I guess we only have our own experiences to judge that by.

 

[voitokas]

Half of the students at the top 10 are non trad.

I wonder at your definition of non-trad

 

[beckhunter116]

Half of the students at the top 10 are non trad.

Ok, I shouldn't have included my first sentence.

 

[Slowpoke]

trad = undergrad -> medical school
non-trad = undergrad -> job, career, (something other than med-school prep) -> med school

 

[beckhunter116]

Of course, that could mean that 1 or 2 yrs at a job could make you a non-trad and you have to admit that there is a difference between that applicant and someone who has been out of school 10-15 years. Although, I fall in between both of those so again I shouldn't have generalized in the first place.

 

[howelljolly]

While I am glad that your friend was able to get help, this is not something that is specifically DO oriented.

The lungs can't expand on their own, so they need muscles to move them, this means that the DO who helped your friend did not "cause the lungs to expand", he just used different muscles to expand the rib cage, which in turn expands the lungs. The diaphragm is your primary inspiratory muscle, and if it gets injured, you will have trouble breathing. However, there are secondary muscles - the intercostals and sternocleidomastoid - that can lift the rib cage and inflate the lung. If a person can't use their diaphragm, a possible short term treatment would be using these secondary muscles. This is accomplished by telling the person to breath as though they were running, which will use mainly these secondary muscles. Of course, once at a hospital, the doctors will try to get the diaphragm working again.

This is just basic knowledge of the muscle systems and how they work, not necessarily OMM.

Thank you doctor. I wouldn't go splitting hairs on that post, because obviously the poster doesnt understand what was happening clinically - unless the osteopath did a Belsey Fundoplication before the paramedics got there. But, there are techniques specific to osteopathy which can acutely change the structure of the thorax or something. These are necessarily OMM, and not allopathic.

Ive seen a DO ease a patients breathing during an asthma attack by yanking the ribs down. Yes, thats basic lung mechanics and physiology, but the treatment is osteopathic not allopathic. Allopathic treatment focuses only on the bronchoconstriction and inflammation, and lets the lung mechanics and WOB correct itself. Osteopathic treatment includes the lung mechanics and WOB in the first steps.

 

[KG216]

I'm under the impression that OMM is a minor part of the curriculum and the vast majority of DOs never practice it.

What I meant when I said osteopathy is dangerous nonsense is that people die from cervical dissections and receive other serious injuries from osteopathic manipulations with a relatively mild benefit. A pharmaceutical intervention is probably a much safer and effective way to treat pain.

Ok, I can see what you mean. I can't say I agree because I haven't done a ton of research on the shortcomings- but I am sure it's very true (and others will agree) that there are certain times where OMM is just simply not the best choice.

That's rather ironic since your MDApps seems to support my statement

Yes, rather ironic. You know my WHOLE story and personal motives based on my MDapps. I said your comment was lame because you're basically implying that everyone going DO is somehow "less" than you. Honestly, for whatever reason someone chooses to go DO, it really doesn't deserve the label of being a reject from allo school- that sounds so condescending. Your comment just seemed a little conceited and cocky, despite however you may have intended it to come across. That's the reason I said that.

Nice. Glad you treat your future colleagues with such respect. Did mommy tell you you were the best med student ever to grace this fine earth? You must be so proud of yourself.

^^ 👍👍

Do DO's make good doctors? Sure, they're perfectly competent. But that doesnt mean DO schools aren't viewed as a plan B for most people who are also applying to MD programs. This doesn't speak to the quality of the schools themselves, only the strength of the applicants applying.

I'll agree to a certain point- the schools may be perfectly fine, but not all applicants have the 3.9/40 you may see in an allo school. They also aren't the same as the people who go Carib.

Well, at least you gave the most basic bit of truth about DO's- they're good and competent. Regardless of whatever "flaw" (and I use that term loosely) they may have in their application, in the end they are intelligent and competent. In the end-What does it matter how they became a doctor?? People are trying to achieve their goals/dreams just like you are- what does it matter if it's a backup?

 

[Daedra22]

I'm not sure that DO's and MD's need to be the same thing. For people who chose DO as a "backup" option (and I recognize that this accounts for much of the applicant pool), then I'm sure they would love to have that MD next to their name. I did not apply to osteopathic schools with the idea that they were "lesser" than their allopathic counterparts, and I'm actually excited about learning OMM, and gaining a familiarity with doing hands-on exams. I liked the traits I saw in the DO that I shadowed, and he used OMM where it was appropriate; meaning, only in about 10% of his cases. I'm all for that. I like that I, unlike a number of people in this thread, see a place for alternative treatments in the medical world. It doesn't make me better, it makes me different (yes, I know, cliche).

Rather than changing the degrees, I would like to see consideration given to talking to the public about DO's. Doctors in general do a poor job of communicating to the people at large; sometimes I think that more people get their medical advice from Grey's Anatomy than from an actual physician. Along the lines of this problem, many people do not know what a DO is or if DO's are trained like MD's. If we had some good DO writers, or a few columns/interviews with DO's, it would go a long way to help get the word out about the profession. But, perhaps I'm just being silly.

 

[KG216]

I did not apply to osteopathic schools with the idea that they were "lesser" than their allopathic counterparts, and I'm actually excited about learning OMM, and gaining a familiarity with doing hands-on exams. I liked the traits I saw in the DO that I shadowed, and he used OMM where it was appropriate; meaning, only in about 10% of his cases. I'm all for that. I like that I, unlike a number of people in this thread, see a place for alternative treatments in the medical world. It doesn't make me better, it makes me different (yes, I know, cliche).

Rather than changing the degrees, I would like to see consideration given to talking to the public about DO's. Doctors in general do a poor job of communicating to the people at large; sometimes I think that more people get their medical advice from Grey's Anatomy than from an actual physician. Along the lines of this problem, many people do not know what a DO is or if DO's are trained like MD's. If we had some good DO writers, or a few columns/interviews with DO's, it would go a long way to help get the word out about the profession. But, perhaps I'm just being silly.

Well said!

 

[howelljolly]

Modern medicine, aka pharmaceuticals, don't necessarily follow the scientific method. There are numerous drugs designed for a specific condition that are prescribed for other reasons. These other reasons aren't always tested.

But how did that drug make it onto the market? The scientific method. Randomized placebo controlled double blind clinical trials. Do doctors sometimes prescribe things for off-label use? Yes, but it's not going to be covered by an insurance company, and it may not work. In many circumstances it's pretty wasteful to do that.

And drug companies are not stupid. As soon as they find out doctors are prescribing a drug for off label use they're going to investigate it so they can advertise the new use and make more money. That's pretty much how Viagra was discovered. But you're seriously nuts if you're a doctor and prescribe a blood pressure medicine to give a patient an erection.

You have a lot to learn grasshopper. You need to find out how drugs are developed, and how the multiphase trials are run. MANY drugs are discovered by accident. And the multiphase trial method really takes it on faith that the drug works. Its largely up to the drug companies to demonstrate an efficacy. The drug trial is more to determine side effects, dosages, and drug dynamics and kinetics.

Toxic drugs such as cancer chemotherapy dont even have to follow the multiphase trial process.

She's right - drug companies don't always use the scientific method, and she isnt talking about off-label uses. Many drugs were designed for one thing and used for something else. Its a huge list, and Viagra is simply the most exciting example. Add to that BCG, thalidomide, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers.......

 

[howelljolly]

I'm under the impression that OMM is a minor part of the curriculum and the vast majority of DOs never practice it.

What I meant when I said osteopathy is dangerous nonsense is that people die from cervical dissections and receive other serious injuries from osteopathic manipulations with a relatively mild benefit. A pharmaceutical intervention is probably a much safer and effective way to treat pain.

The hell is a cervical dissection?

OMM is not a "minor part of the curriculum", well maybe it is, but thats not the point. The osteopathic model of disease is different from the allopathic model, which is different from the traditional Chinese model.

The osteopathic model is close enough to the allopathic model where it doesn't alter the allopathic side of the treatment. So, MDs and DOs can play in the sandbox together. Unlike trad. Chinese who would have a fit if you tried to cut someone open to operate.

 

[Crisoneogenesis]

I THINK ALL MD SCHOOLS SHOULD BECOME DO's!! 👍







Not really....lets keep the distinction between the two....you know, so we can have these wonderful hair splitting threads where one argues: "Oh lordy, those MD's are so numbers based and dont care about the whole patient" and another argues "Oh those underacheving DO's, with their lower admission standards...pshhh soooo not the same as MD's".....cut the s***.....you make yourself into the doctor you want to be, DO or MD....be open to either

 

[KG216]

So, MDs and DOs can play in the sandbox together.

👍

 

[circulus vitios]

I like how DO schools have slightly lower stats then MD schools. It's good for students who don't have inflated grades yet still want to become doctors. Making DO schools MD schools would probably do away with this, which kind of sucks.

 

[280224]

If you want an MD to to an MD school.

 

[Daedra22]

I like how DO schools have slightly lower stats then MD schools. It's good for students who don't have inflated grades yet still want to become doctors. Making DO schools MD schools would probably do away with this, which kind of sucks.

I don't necessarily think it has as much to do with grade inflation as much as it has to do with disadvantaged students, and those who had an unusual path through their undergrad. I also appreciate the lower stats, because it gives students who have demonstrated character and academic success despite life challenges a shot at med school. Just because you got a 28 instead of a 30 and a 3.4 instead of a 3.8 does not mean that you are unintelligent, or would make a poor physician. The DO school tradition of looking at the "whole" candidate is, I think, helpful to the entire medical profession.

 

[cubssox2000]

Thank you doctor. I wouldn't go splitting hairs on that post, because obviously the poster doesnt understand what was happening clinically - unless the osteopath did a Belsey Fundoplication before the paramedics got there. But, there are techniques specific to osteopathy which can acutely change the structure of the thorax or something. These are necessarily OMM, and not allopathic.

True, both techniques would work, and we can't know which one was done. It would seem unlikely for the doctor to do a Belsey Fundoplication while waiting for the paramedics. What are the techniques that can change the structure of the thorax enough so that a person does not need to use their diaphragm? The thorax is fairly immobile, so the way to increase breathing would have to be through muscles.

Ive seen a DO ease a patients breathing during an asthma attack by yanking the ribs down. Yes, thats basic lung mechanics and physiology, but the treatment is osteopathic not allopathic. Allopathic treatment focuses only on the bronchoconstriction and inflammation, and lets the lung mechanics and WOB correct itself. Osteopathic treatment includes the lung mechanics and WOB in the first steps.

Pulling the ribs down, while it might ease the patients breathing, will not stop the attack, and is a very short term remedy. Are you saying that allopathy focuses on pushing drugs? Because if so, you might need to update your definition.

 

[20minutes]

The DO school tradition of looking at the "whole" candidate is, I think, helpful to the entire medical profession.

I really don't know why this perception is perpetuated. My stats are nothing above mediocre, so the MD adcoms had to have looked at my "whole" application. It just so happens I have a compelling application that would have gone over just as well for DO adcoms as it has MD adcoms.

FWIW I chose my personal physician explicitly because he's a DO (and a very good one at that), despite my desire to get an MD.

 

[Daedra22]

I really don't know why this perception is perpetuated. My stats are nothing above mediocre, so the MD adcoms had to have looked at my "whole" application. It just so happens I have a compelling application that would have gone over just as well for DO adcoms as it has MD adcoms.

FWIW I chose my personal physician explicitly because he's a DO (and a very good one at that), despite my desire to get an MD.

I don't know... I had a compelling application and middling stats, and while I applied to lower-tier and middle-tier MD schools, I didn't receive any response from them. I was interviewed at all but 1 DO school that I applied to. Individual experiences, I suppose, but I feel pretty strongly that my application may have been screened out due to numbers alone at a few places. I don't resent the fact that they do that, but I'm aware that they probably do.

Edit: You think that a 34 is mediocre...? Those aren't really the kind of numbers that I'm talking about.

 

[Daedra22]

Again that 3.4 28 isn't only DO students. I know several with scores like that at MD schools. Even harvard which could take all 35+s takes 30s on the MCAT for students if they have a good application and other things that look impressive. It is not fair to assume that DO schools are the only ones that look at whole application.

And I did not say that DO's are the only ones. They simply do so more often than MD schools, as far as I can see. You cannot deny that many applicants who were denied at MD schools found a place to pursue their education at DO schools, which were the only schools that would take them.

 

[softmed]

You have a lot to learn grasshopper. You need to find out how drugs are developed, and how the multiphase trials are run. MANY drugs are discovered by accident. And the multiphase trial method really takes it on faith that the drug works. Its largely up to the drug companies to demonstrate an efficacy. The drug trial is more to determine side effects, dosages, and drug dynamics and kinetics.

Toxic drugs such as cancer chemotherapy dont even have to follow the multiphase trial process.

She's right - drug companies don't always use the scientific method, and she isnt talking about off-label uses. Many drugs were designed for one thing and used for something else. Its a huge list, and Viagra is simply the most exciting example. Add to that BCG, thalidomide, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers.......

I actually know quite a bit about preclinical drug testing and clinical trials (I would hope I do, I'm having a test on it this Thursday). Yes, many drugs are discovered by accident, but they still go through an extensive preclinical testing as well as the three phase trials (I should say four phase trials). Phase I trials are an attempt to test toxicity, side effects, and other factors. Phase II and III are when we start looking at efficacy.

Drugs that do not work, don't make it past II or III. These trials cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and by the end of the trial about 1 drug in 5000 makes it to the clinic. When a possible new use is discovered, the drug goes back through the trials for that specific use. You make it sound like people just accept that something works for a different use and don't test it first.

EDIT: As an interesting aside, I actually do preclinical drug testing on animal models. Almost all of the drugs I work with have already been approved by the FDA, but I'm using them in a disease that has not been approved yet. And how do I determine whether these drugs have an effect? Using the scientific method.

 

[softmed]

The hell is a cervical dissection?

Cervical artery dissection. Literally 100s of people have died or had severe complications as a result of neck manipulations.

 

[sylvanthus]

As a current DO student I can tell you that there is very little to the whole DO philosophy. The only difference I have seen thus far is OMM. So, I agree with the idea of making DO programs MD programs, but would add the possibility of doing an optional OMM certificate for every medical student in the country.

I think this would be beneficial for a number of reasons.

1) Get rid of entirely this DO vs MD nonsense and create one residency match system.

2) Actually increase the number of practicing OMM practitioners since OMM would be opened up to ALL medical schools.

3) Reserve OMM for those who actually believe in it and want to practice it.

But, this will never fly due simply to politics and money. There is no way the DOs who are in charge of the AOA will ever want to give up the power that they have. It just wont happen. Though I agree it should.

 

[FIREitUP]

As a current DO student I can tell you that there is very little to the whole DO philosophy. The only difference I have seen thus far is OMM. So, I agree with the idea of making DO programs MD programs, but would add the possibility of doing an optional OMM certificate for every medical student in the country.

I think this would be beneficial for a number of reasons.

1) Get rid of entirely this DO vs MD nonsense and create one residency match system.

2) Actually increase the number of practicing OMM practitioners since OMM would be opened up to ALL medical schools.

3) Reserve OMM for those who actually believe in it and want to practice it.

But, this will never fly due simply to politics and money. There is no way the DOs who are in charge of the AOA will ever want to give up the power that they have. It just wont happen. Though I agree it should.

👍concise and intelligent answer.

 

[softmed]

I found a great article on quackwatch about Osteopathy:

http://www.quackwatch.com/04ConsumerEducation/QA/osteo.html

 

[howelljolly]

And so this has officially turned into an Osteopath-bashing thread.

Strong work.

 

[locus000]

I found a great article on quackwatch about Osteopathy:

http://www.quackwatch.com/04ConsumerEducation/QA/osteo.html

From the link above "Many observers believe that osteopathy and medicine should merge. But osteopathic organizations prefer to retain a separate identity and have exaggerated the minor differences between osteopathy and medicine in their marketing."

DO school DONT want to be MD school! Plain and Simple!!!!!

 

[howelljolly]

To be expected; even trying to give a little education info is ignored. I posted the science behind what I'm taught and then rebutted cervical dissection... both to which weren't answer... I'm assuming they hit home a bit.

Whatever. I already have an MD.

 

[rkaz]

Cervical artery dissection. Literally 100s of people have died or had severe complications as a result of neck manipulations.

At my osteopathic school, we are shown ways to minimize risk of damaging any arteries of the cervical region while providing treatment. I know many DOs are frightened with those rapid neck cracking often associated with chiropractic treatment, and instead opt for a more gentle approach. This helps reduce risk. Sometimes HVLA can be used if it would be considered effective in a situation, but we learn about contraindications as well for performing such techniques.