DO schools should become MD

[howelljolly]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Yeah... and you're more supportive than those that haven't even gotten through school yet.

That quote wasn't directed towards you.

I know. 😛

 

[softmed]

Since you said I didn't respond to this I will. The reason I didn't is because I didn't really want to keep arguing because I know how these arguments end up (going in circles).

Yes, but ultimately we are taught to restore homeostasis. That homestasis is found upon what I said.

To clarify:

We are taught that somatic dysfunction is the diagnosis. It can be a spinal issue such as rotated right, sidebent right, flexed. However, in our treatment we don't specifically treat only that vertebral section. You have to take into account the surrounding area. By doing OMT, you are reinstating the body's balance to correct the problem. You may adjust a joint, you may perform myofasical release, you may do soft-tissue technique. But, through any of these practices you are reinstating the homestasis of the body. That stasis is brought about by the fluids of the body which directly affect the joints, muscles, bones, nerves, etc.

The homeostasis aspects of osteopathy are probably the less scientific claims. How do you know when you've restore homeostasis? How do you measure it? What IS homeostasis? I won't deny that after some research, it does look like osteopathy works for back pain, but I cannot endorse these grandiose claims about homeostasis.

If you're getting any type of arterial dissection in the neck, probably from HVLA, it is because of excessive force or existing pathology. Any trained DO knows how to screen for possible pathologies and also the correct amount of force to use. The premise behind forceful HVLA is high velocity, low amplitude. You're not spinning the person's head around their neck. Let's be real. You cite "100's" of cases... OMM has been practiced for over a hundred years. That's an excellent record if you ask me.

I was giving a very conservative estimation when talking about injuries resulting from OMM. It's probably closer to 1000s in the past decade. The procedure is probably safe when done correctly, but I don't see a benefit above a pharmaceutical intervention that outweighs even the smallest of risks of death.

 

[Ashers]

You guys know that back in the 1960s DOs in California were given the opportunity to change their degree to an MD, and that UCI started as an osteopathic medical school before it was taken over by the UC system.

California deemed the degrees equivalent, and just from a brief search online, I saw that they had to take a brief course and pay $65. I initially heard about the DO -> MD thing from my dad who was at UCI shortly after the switch.

I've worked with a few DO residents (in different specialties), and they've been great to work with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Irvine_Medical_Center

(google osteopathic assimilation 1960s for the other info.)

 

[Cactus14]

You know, I think that it's ridiculous how people get their panties all bunched up over MD vs DO degrees.

If people are so concerned about the letters that follow their name, perhaps they shouldn't be in the medical field. It's obvious that their minds are focused on matters other than treating patients.

If you don't like something about DO, don't apply to a DO school, and the same goes for MD.

on and BTW, I ONLY applied to DO schools, for a variety of reasons. One of them was so that I wouldn't have to deal with arrogant MD students (like those who actually argue on this site) who think they're better than everybody else.

 

[softmed]

on and BTW, I ONLY applied to DO schools, for a variety of reasons. One of them was so that I wouldn't have to deal with arrogant MD students (like those who actually argue on this site) who think they're better than everybody else.

But I hope you're taking note that I'm not saying MD > DO. I think they're precisely equivalent and should just be called MD. I liked the idea earlier of having a certificate program in osteopathy for MD (which would include MD and current DO schools) so they can receive a DO as an option.

Softmed:

Homeostasis is felt through palpation. I'm sure you could do a series of conductance experiments or something else to determine if homeostasis has been achieved. The biggest determinant however is your patient's feedback. The patient will undoubtedly let you know how he or she feels.

As for complications and injuries from HVLA/treatment on the c-spine... I found this statement from the AOA that compares treatments: http://www.osteopathic.org/pdf/cal_hod09res257.pdf

Homeostasis really sounds like woo woo to me. I can understand the idea that you can feel a broken bone or torn ligament, but the idea that you can feel if someone's homeostasis is out of balance just sounds ridiculous.

However that report is very interesting, though I think it's reporting the data in a strange way. For starters, they're taking the pure "number of cervical spine manipulations per year" and comparing them to the number of Americans using NSAIDs. They should be comparing the number of patients using cervical spine manipulations and the number of patients using NSAIDs for the same reason. Similarly, their rates of adverse outcomes are based on per use rather than the number of patients.

So perhaps I am wrong about OMM being particularly dangerous. There are some claims that I'll reiterate sound grandiose and very mystical--like the idea that you can balance the body and bring out its natural healing powers by manipulations, and that is my main problem with OMM.

 

[WDeagle]

I found a great article on quackwatch about Osteopathy:

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

It seems that alot of people who arent exposed to OMT or have learned the principles behind it misunderstand what OMT really is. It probably doesnt help that every weeks there is a new thread on how stupid Cranial Manipulation is (which it is). Ive never heard the words "realignment" in regards to OMT except the first OMT class i had which we were taught that there is no such principle. Most of OMT in my experience is restoring normal range of motion. Alot of OMT is a standardized form of some really common sense principles.

 

[howelljolly]

But I hope you're taking note that I'm not saying MD > DO. I think they're precisely equivalent and should just be called MD. I liked the idea earlier of having a certificate program in osteopathy for MD (which would include MD and current DO schools) so they can receive a DO as an option.

.

Oh bother.

Degrees dont just change abbreviations because you want them to.

- DMD and DDS are different degrees, and both practice as dentists.
- BA and AB are both bachelors degrees, the second is from an Ivy League school.
- Some grad schools give PhDs in biochemistry, some give a DSc.
- NPC and APNC are both nurse-practitioners
- MD and DO are both physicians/surgoens

You are obviously hung up on the letters after your name, instead of on the profession itself. This is not going to happen. The powers that be (and there is no degree-changing-committee, so there are no powers that be), are not reading this forum.

If you are so hung up in the letters after your name, apply to only MD schools.

 

[Dissected]

There's a reason none of that is taught in MD schools: it's unproven and probably pure nonsense. You cannot just "align" some bones and expect that somehow the nerves now have a direct route. You have to actually conduct a study where it's shown to be greater than a placebo effect.

We don't just align bones and hope for the best. I would encourage you to actually study the techniques and philosophies you are bashing before you make outrageous unfounded claims. It is difficult to find the info without learning at a DO institution (I even have a hard time with the material provided here by our profs...) but really..you have no idea what you are talking about, therefore no right to denounce Osteopathic manipulative medicine. Its pretty cool to actually see some results in myofascial and musculoskeletal dysfunctions after the doctors do their work and some that we've even been able to do as students. Its very systematic and works very well for related structural/functional problems. It has limitations, more than many in the field would likely care to admit, but for you to brush it off like you know it does nothing is preposterous.

EDIT: I did a little research and it does sound like meta analysis have shown OMM to have an effect on back pain, but it has nothing to do with the actual bone alignment giving nerves a more direct route, but rather an immune and hormone response to the manipulations.

link?

The homeostasis aspects of osteopathy are probably the less scientific claims. How do you know when you've restore homeostasis? How do you measure it? What IS homeostasis? I won't deny that after some research, it does look like osteopathy works for back pain, but I cannot endorse these grandiose claims about homeostasis.

palpation. it sounds foreign, but again hold your tongue on bashing these techniques before you know more about them or have experienced it for yourself. i've been pretty amazed what my hands have been able to feel upon manipulation. Unfortunately you cannot receive reimbursement for preventitive care, which I think OMM would have a really good application in by keeping people's bodies in good balance. I haven't seen a lot of patients actually fixed on a gross scale, but our OMM doctors present some pretty neat cases. I'm not going to be the one to accuse them of exaggerating or falsifying their patient outcomes. And they know when to refer to a specialist or more appropriate medical care when necessary. They are physicians after all.

I was giving a very conservative estimation when talking about injuries resulting from OMM. It's probably closer to 1000s in the past decade. The procedure is probably safe when done correctly, but I don't see a benefit above a pharmaceutical intervention that outweighs even the smallest of risks of death.

If you're going to make claims to this magnitude you MUST provide a source of some kind. You keep talking about 'science this' and 'science that'.. so lets see some numbers that support the moribidity/mortality that you clam to be caused by manipulation. (and don't post some chiropractor bullcrap, becase they are not trained in the same fashion as OMT docs)

This is very true and if it were one degree rather then multiple different degrees as the OP is suggesting to do this would not be an issue. as someone else already noted the AOA would never allow it because they still want the power and the idea that they are different because they teach the full OMM course even though most DOs I know have zero plans of using most of it.

I remember LECOM bradenton's talks on their school and rather then talking about their students clinical experience, they spent all their time harping on how OMM is the greatest gift of god and the color of their tiles. Quite sad.

The other end of DO schools didn't do that but there's many amongst the older crowds that still want to make a distinction rather then recognize that ultimately while the founder of DO medicine wanted something so opposite of his MD within medicine, the truth is DO medicine has come full circle back to realizing what works is the methods used in allopathy in combination with some parts of OMM.

But it is what it is. Like others have also stated there are different degree names for the dental degree so what does it matter at the end once they are practicing.

👍

 

[Dissected]

I was giving a very conservative estimation when talking about injuries resulting from OMM. It's probably closer to 1000s in the past decade. The procedure is probably safe when done correctly, but I don't see a benefit above a pharmaceutical intervention that outweighs even the smallest of risks of death.

oh, and one more thing..you can bet your ass that there have been exponentially more deaths from DRUG reactions and overdose than treatment by manipulation...i mean come on. Drugs are dangerous chemicals! They save lives yes, but they also take them very frequently.

HVLA is RARELY used in the clinic. but you might not even know the difference, because you don't seem to have researched this stuff hardly at all. At least learn the different types of manipulation techniques. gawd almighty.

 

[mmmcdowe]

oh, and one more thing..you can bet your ass that there have been exponentially more deaths from DRUG reactions and overdose than treatment by manipulation...i mean come on. Drugs are dangerous chemicals! They save lives yes, but they also take them very frequently.

HVLA is RARELY used in the clinic. but you might not even know the difference, because you don't seem to have researched this stuff hardly at all. At least learn the different types of manipulation techniques. gawd almighty.

I definitely agree that it is a straw man argument to say that OMM shouldn't be used because people die from it. As you say, people die from medication too. I think a better argument for or against OMM would be a cost/benefit analysis. How many people die or have morbidity from OMM relative to those that have significant clinical improvements due to it when placebo effect is screened out.

 

[softmed]

We don't just align bones and hope for the best. I would encourage you to actually study the techniques and philosophies you are bashing before you make outrageous unfounded claims. It is difficult to find the info without learning at a DO institution (I even have a hard time with the material provided here by our profs...) but really..you have no idea what you are talking about, therefore no right to denounce Osteopathic manipulative medicine. Its pretty cool to actually see some results in myofascial and musculoskeletal dysfunctions after the doctors do their work and some that we've even been able to do as students. Its very systematic and works very well for related structural/functional problems. It has limitations, more than many in the field would likely care to admit, but for you to brush it off like you know it does nothing is preposterous.

I have every right to brush it off. The evidence for these claims is ambiguous at best. I do not need to sit in a classroom, learn the techniques, and use them on patients to know whether something works or not. Personal experience is a poor form of evidence, and case studies have little to no power. The science simply isn't there for all the claims made by OMM and you do not need to be an expert to understand that (although you do have to understand the science).

 

[DocWiki]

I have every right to brush it off. The evidence for these claims is ambiguous at best. I do not need to sit in a classroom, learn the techniques, and use them on patients to know whether something works or not. Personal experience is a poor form of evidence, and case studies have little to no power. The science simply isn't there for all the claims made by OMM and you do not need to be an expert to understand that (although you do have to understand the science).

Above is right. Anecdotal evidence tells us nothing. I was once told that if you drink 2 gallons of water a day you will lose 10 pounds in 2 weeks. Who told me this? Someone who drank 2 gallons of water a day and lost 10 pounds in 2 weeks. Is this evidence that drinking 2 gallons of water a day will cause you to lose 10 pounds in 2 weeks? Of course it isn't. This man would tell you otherwise and he tries to pass it on to others.

Now obviously OMM is not even close to something like that. Yet, falling into the instinctive way of thinking that because it works for me, it is scientifically valid, is absurd. I think that there is great parts of OMM out there. However, it needs to be put to the test in some significant analytical epidemiological studies for it to ever carry weight in other fields besides Osteopathic Medicine. Honestly, it should be put to the test more thoroughly for it to carry weight in Osteopathic Medicine as well!! Why do you think the majority of DO's do not use it?

That being said, if there is significant benefits from OMM it should be used in other medical professions. However, until this evidence is provided any health care provider has every right to brush it off.

I think the problem is that it is hard to get critical research done on the subject because the only people that want to, or could study its effects thoroughly, are people that use it as a treatment or method of care already.

Disclaimer: I am an Osteopathic medical student (Yet, I am also a believer in thorough scientific analysis)

 

[RogueUnicorn]

a lot of medicine as a whole is pixie dust and finger crossing anyway, i don't see why OMM needs to establish itself as an absolutely airtight modality

 

[Dissected]

I have every right to brush it off. The evidence for these claims is ambiguous at best. I do not need to sit in a classroom, learn the techniques, and use them on patients to know whether something works or not. Personal experience is a poor form of evidence, and case studies have little to no power. The science simply isn't there for all the claims made by OMM and you do not need to be an expert to understand that (although you do have to understand the science).

. *****ic comment of the day.

That is an extremely ignorant point of view. Personal experience is what modern medicine itself is based on. Read some Vesalius.

And you can brush it off all you want, I misspoke. What I should have said is you can't be a critic without really knowing what is going on. You can't possibly know whether OMM works or not. So why do you insist on denouncing it? You assume very much without actually knowing what you are talking about.

You are making yourself sound very silly with your latest responses, btw.

 

[Dissected]

oh and did you find those sources?





didn't think so.

 

[DocWiki]

a lot of medicine as a whole is pixie dust and finger crossing anyway, i don't see why OMM needs to establish itself as an absolutely airtight modality

Yes, I understand that. It does not have to in order to be used by some. I just feel that if it has such significant benefits it should be used by other health care providers as well. Yet, in order for that to happen there needs to be some more significant evidence behind it in the form of multiple, large, analytical studies. Also, to get back to the point of the thread, this evidence would need to be present for these degrees to be combined.

 

[WDeagle]

I have every right to brush it off. The evidence for these claims is ambiguous at best. I do not need to sit in a classroom, learn the techniques, and use them on patients to know whether something works or not. Personal experience is a poor form of evidence, and case studies have little to no power. The science simply isn't there for all the claims made by OMM and you do not need to be an expert to understand that (although you do have to understand the science).

Your right there is nothing scientific about using personal experience as evidence. However, i would venture to say the majority of physicians use personal experience to make medical decisions everyday. If a doctor prescribes a certain statin to a certain population of patients and he finds that it works best regardless of what the guidlines say, he is going to use that statin. There is a reason that there are 10+ statins on the market rather than the one or two that the guidlines recommend. The whole reason we train for so long is so we can make decisions based on personal experience. Otherwise we can get an NP, PA, or some DoctorBot to follow some flowchart on making medical decisions.

If a fully trained physcian uses OMT in certain situations and finds that his patients condition improves then why would he stop treating his patients with it just because enough studies havent been done on it. Im not bashing the scientific method in anyway, but sometimes its just not feasible to try to prove every little thing in medicine. It would be stupid to spend tons of money on OMT research because in the end its just an adjunct therapy. Spend the money on something else.

 

[cubssox2000]

oh bother.

Degrees dont just change abbreviations because you want them to.

- dmd and dds are different degrees, and both practice as dentists.
- ba and ab are both bachelors degrees, the second is from an ivy league school.
- some grad schools give phds in biochemistry, some give a dsc.
- npc and apnc are both nurse-practitioners
- md and do are both physicians/surgoens

you are obviously hung up on the letters after your name, instead of on the profession itself. This is not going to happen. The powers that be (and there is no degree-changing-committee, so there are no powers that be), are not reading this forum.

If you are so hung up in the letters after your name, apply to only md schools.

+1

 

[Longshanks]

I found a great article on quackwatch about Osteopathy:

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

Really? This is what you use as the definitive answer and end to the debate, an obscure reference? You're going to bring up a subjective article not written as an investigative piece but rather one with a predetermined conclusion and persuasion? This article has been brought up many times on SDN and its joke, the guy is obsessed with finding any obscure reference to support his predetermined conclusion.

 

[CatchingUp]

Above is right. Anecdotal evidence tells us nothing. I was once told that if you drink 2 gallons of water a day you will lose 10 pounds in 2 weeks. Who told me this? Someone who drank 2 gallons of water a day and lost 10 pounds in 2 weeks. Is this evidence that drinking 2 gallons of water a day will cause you to lose 10 pounds in 2 weeks? Of course it isn't. This man would tell you otherwise and he tries to pass it on to others.

Now obviously OMM is not even close to something like that. Yet, falling into the instinctive way of thinking that because it works for me, it is scientifically valid, is absurd. I think that there is great parts of OMM out there. However, it needs to be put to the test in some significant analytical epidemiological studies for it to ever carry weight in other fields besides Osteopathic Medicine. Honestly, it should be put to the test more thoroughly for it to carry weight in Osteopathic Medicine as well!! Why do you think the majority of DO's do not use it?

That being said, if there is significant benefits from OMM it should be used in other medical professions. However, until this evidence is provided any health care provider has every right to brush it off.

I think the problem is that it is hard to get critical research done on the subject because the only people that want to, or could study its effects thoroughly, are people that use it as a treatment or method of care already.

Disclaimer: I am an Osteopathic medical student (Yet, I am also a believer in thorough scientific analysis)

Could it be that "most" don't use it because many of them were allo-rejects (as someone stated earlier in this thread) who only went to a DO school because it was their back-up plan. Therefore, they already had preconceived notions about OMM. Just a thought.

If there are people who believe it works and are using it why not let them continue? If you don't believe in it, fine, but don't take up space at a DO school where they teach it only because you couldn't get into an allo program and then try and belittle it.

 

[Longshanks]

But I hope you're taking note that I'm not saying MD > DO. I think they're precisely equivalent and should just be called MD. I liked the idea earlier of having a certificate program in osteopathy for MD (which would include MD and current DO schools) so they can receive a DO as an option.

But you have turned it into a MD vs DO thread and that has been the position you've been representing.

Homeostasis really sounds like woo woo to me. I can understand the idea that you can feel a broken bone or torn ligament, but the idea that you can feel if someone's homeostasis is out of balance just sounds ridiculous.

What is woo woo?

Something doesn't have been broken or torn for you to feel something is wrong. Not being an osteopathic student I'm not experienced in what palpitating 'homeostasis' is, though I have read about their principles and my primary care provider is a DO. However, from my experience in competitive sports, there are many times when you know personally whether something is wrong or someone else can feel something is off key that may now show up on a traditional radiological examination. Conversely, the opposite can happen in sports to when nothing seems more wrong than the usual ache and pains and then you find a bulging disk in someone's neck. I wouldn't simply write something off if you haven't seen or experience OMM or learn about its fundamentals first.

However that report is very interesting, though I think it's reporting the data in a strange way. For starters, they're taking the pure "number of cervical spine manipulations per year" and comparing them to the number of Americans using NSAIDs. They should be comparing the number of patients using cervical spine manipulations and the number of patients using NSAIDs for the same reason. Similarly, their rates of adverse outcomes are based on per use rather than the number of patients.

So perhaps I am wrong about OMM being particularly dangerous. There are some claims that I'll reiterate sound grandiose and very mystical--like the idea that you can balance the body and bring out its natural healing powers by manipulations, and that is my main problem with OMM.

Pharmacological drugs don't come without side-effects either. NSAIDs aren't miracle drugs, and have their own GI and liver side effects to worry about. You could find just as many people that had an adverse side effect to a pharmacological agent as someone who had an adverse effect to experiencing OMM. And if one of the points of OMM is to increase blood flow and lymph flow, then it is possible that the immune system can function better and increased circulation can bring nutrients to the area, which should promote healing. The body is remarkedly capable of healing, otherwise we wouldn't have made it this far as a species back in a time when injuries were possibly a daily occurrence.


Don't be so quick to discount personal experience, especially your own. As has been often said, practicing medicine is an art. Why is the training so long an arduous? Sure, to learn the science and methodologies, but also to gain experience so that you can make the proper judgment calls or be able to respond to a novel situation, and be creative with the knowledge you've gained. It is more than just the scientific method or a flow chart analysis of situations.

 

[coffeebythelake]

well.. looking at DO school and Md school gpa's..
you forget.. DO schools have grade replacement.. that is a testament in itself that they care less about numbers and more about the person's will and personality..

You make a big leap here. No, what it means is they have lower grade standards. It says nothing about caring more about will and personality.

 

[DocWiki]

Could it be that "most" don't use it because many of them were allo-rejects (as someone stated earlier in this thread) who only went to a DO school because it was their back-up plan. Therefore, they already had preconceived notions about OMM. Just a thought.

If there are people who believe it works and are using it why not let them continue? If you don't believe in it, fine, but don't take up space at a DO school where they teach it only because you couldn't get into an allo program and then try and belittle it.

Being an allo-reject has nothing to do with whether someone practices OMM or not. That is just false logic. However, I am sure preconceived notions do play a factor for some.


I'm not really sure if you were reading my posts thoroughly? I was not saying that people should not use it. Nor was I saying that I don't think there are very effective aspects of it. I was saying that if it is as effective as some people make it seem then it should be put through some large studies and adopted in other medical fields. There is no reason that MDs, PAs, NPCs, etc. should not use it if the effectiveness is well defined. Until then, people using it can and should of course keep on using it??? I never said they should stop???

Belittle it? So asking that something should be tested through the scientific process is belittling it? Honestly, I'm sorry that I'm taking up your spot in medical school because I feel that might be where this bitterness is coming from.

 

[KG216]

Longshanks for user of the year!

👍👍 amen to that Bacchus!!😀

 

[DocWiki]

There are GME credits for OMM. You can't just up and do OMM. Some techniques are simple, but you still need to train/practice. And, there are some techniques with common themes among the manipulative specialties (DO, DC, DPT).

Sorry I guess I didn't specify that I meant they should train in it and then use it. Obviously they just can't up and use it. I also understand that it requires practice to become proficient at.

 

[Dissected]

Could it be that "most" don't use it because many of them were allo-rejects (as someone stated earlier in this thread) who only went to a DO school because it was their back-up plan. Therefore, they already had preconceived notions about OMM. Just a thought.

If there are people who believe it works and are using it why not let them continue? If you don't believe in it, fine, but don't take up space at a DO school where they teach it only because you couldn't get into an allo program and then try and belittle it.

I resent the term 'allo rejects'

Its innacurate in many cases and most if not all of my classmates are more than happy where they are. My school is flippin awesome, its exactly what I would look for in a medical school, and that's all that matters.

and no. thats not why most don't use it. That is preposterous.

 

[howelljolly]

I've seen both categories for sure. I've seen those who couldn't get in MD schools go to DO schools but I've seen and esp. with a lot of nontrads, a personal decision not to apply to MD schools at all for liking the DO schools better or in some cases having chosen a DO school over an MD school for liking it better.

So I guess it goes both ways. That being said, just cuz that allo reject went to a DO school doesn't mean they won't be an awesome classmate. They got in some med school because they were reasonably dedicated and intelligent.

A lot of non-trads who have been around the block a bit might not buy into the (better college student-higher MCAT-escoteric MD stuff-better doc) framework. A lot of traditional students and faculty take it on faith that the harder working and smarter undergrad has something to offer medicine that just can't be equaled. A non-trad might disagree, as would many DO ad-coms.

Its also cultural. If youve ever had the chance to hang out with DC or DPM students residents or attendings. DCs are obsessed with health and well-being, especially their own - physician heal thyself stuff. DPMs are the most non-malignant teachers you'll ever meet. You can learn the same ties and sutures from an MD surgeon, or a DPM ankle surgeon - the DPM will calmly and elegantly teach, while the MD will shout at you and smack your hands. DPMs don't tolerate the unnecessarily nastiness, its not in their culture.

And dont tell me that the podiatrist is doing only minor things. Both MDs and DPMs do amputations, and all amputations can bleed like a mofo,

 

[howelljolly]

And also, it is harder to compare the 2 because its like comparing apples to oranges.

Though there are a lot of people who apply to both MD and DO schools, fact is that there are probably a lot more people applying to MD schools and a lot more people with higher numbers at that.

If it were the other way around and DO schools were the more well known and more traditional route that everyone wanted and MD was the newer degree or philosophy, then DO schools would be more competitive. It is just not the same applicant pool and so the comparison in GPA is not a truly fair one.

Whats gonna happen when you guys get to your residency interviews and a program you're at tells you. : Your grades and scores got you in the door. Now that youre here, they dont matter. Now the only thing that counts is your personality.

 

[NoMoreAMCAS]

I'd like it. There would be a lot more MD schools for vain people like myself to apply to.

Seriously, I didn't apply to DO schools simply because i don't want "DO" after my name for the rest of my life.

 

[Longshanks]

I'd like it. There would be a lot more MD schools for vain people like myself to apply to.

Seriously, I didn't apply to DO schools simply because i don't want "DO" after my name for the rest of my life.

To each their own. No one said its for everyone. Its a matter of preference and comfort with the 'philosophy' with the practice anyhow. Can't knock someone if they aren't comfortable with it, maybe if its for a vain reason 🙄...

More power to whomever if they're in a position to solidly decide on one or the other and be successful.

 

[ensuii]

You're better off worrying about the debt you'll have to pay off and the possibility of malpractice than the letters you'll have at the end of your name.

 

[Hoody]

it should be like A-MD and O-MD or MD-O and MD-A.


honestly it doesn't matter. I was actually browsing through Mayo the other day and was suprised to see how many doctors work there that graduated from foreign medical schools or held MBBS degrees.

I can guarentee in the work place, no one notices. I never ask a doctor if he is MD or DO when taking an order. I never hear Dr.'s introduce them self as a DO or an MD, rather simply as "Dr. So and So." A DO runs our emergency department and a DO is taking over chief of staff/medical director. Same shiz, different day.

 

[crx7]

1. DOs are defensive, interviewing at TCOM they got really mad if you interchanged MD with DO. I say be glad you get to be a doctor if you go this route, however, I believe reapplying and retaking the MCAT are well worth it to get into an MD school.

2. Every DO I met at TCOM went the DO route because they didn't get into an MD school, not because they believe in holistic medicine. This whole thing about holistic medicine and OMM is bunk. Barely any of the DOs practice it and that is for a good reason. It has been scientifically proven to be ineffective in clinical trials. You might as well be a chiropractor if you want to do OMM. Again, if you believe in science, reapply and retake to get into an MD.

3. If we need more MD schools, we will open them, there are currently 8 MD schools in Texas and we're in the process of opening another in addition to expanding current class sizes. We really don't want anything to do with DO schools. They serve their purpose providing rural family care physicians through an alternate route.

4. I'm a non-trad and I have to say that we don't need or like the DO route. If you work hard enough you can get into a good MD school. University of Colorado's average age is 27, and my class has a lot of non-trads. However, for those of you doing your pre-reqs at a community college part time, you're never gonna get in. You need to be serious and commit to medicine before you apply.

 

[howelljolly]

You say that like you are implying that DOs have more personality then MD students and MD students don't have personality. that's simply not true.

There are good and bad students in both sets of schools and good people and arrogant people in both sets of schools.

This is precisely the problem I find is that a lot of DO students get offended by assumptions made about their schools but have assumptions of their own i.e. that a smart student must have no personality, that all MD students are arrogant, that DOs are always nicer, blah blah blah.

If personality is what is being judged I'm sure there will be people from both MD and DO schools that will have such and from both that don't.

But again, like I said I wasn't saying that people were less qualified for med school just cuz they went DO. What I was saying is that in terms of numerical grades/MCAT the reason why you can't compare the grade ranges is because fact is that there is a larger pool of applicants to the MD schools of which include those with the best grades and scores on the MCAT because that is the traditionally mroe accepted and older degree and human nature is to follow with tradition.

That was my point and I'm not sure how you came to discussing personalities from my post.

Your post about MDs being interested in numbers and GPA and such made me think to point out that in the grand scheme of things, somewhere down the line, numbers stop meaning much. For some residency programs, other than needing to meet the cut-off, ones scores are irrelevant. Personality is what counts.

Yes, I agree that its comparing different applicant pools and different fruits. My point is that "qualified" means different things to the different MD or DO ad-coms. But at the end of the game, when the MD or DO goes for residency, "qualified" means something different yet again.

Just some food for thought for the posters on this page who think that MDs are more qualified to practice medicine because their undergrad GPA is higher.

 

[howelljolly]

Again how did you turn my post into a nasty attack on me?? I just made an observation that I've seen both those who couldn't get into MD schools and who I know distinctly were obssessed with idea of MD go DO because it was their only other option short of wasting more time taking the MCAT again and applying again, going to island schools, or giving up if they didn't do DO. That others and like I said several nontraditional students I knew who preferred the DO ideas and went that route, and that is all I stated.

what I DID NOT SAY WAS THAT DOs WERE DOING MINOR STUFF OR DPMS WERE DOING MINOR STUFF or whatever else it is you are accusing me off.

And yes that caps is to yell at you because you are clearly attacking me for notions i did not make.

I made 3 notions on this thread in summary.

1. I made the observation that I like the idea of combining the MD/DO degree and even amonst DOs there are several that will agree with the notion that I agreed upon that the AOA is what is holding back this idea from happening but as both have started to include the same ideas the line is getting fuzzier between why there even needs to be a distinct and separate degree.

2. I said that that there were quite a few students who I knew that did not go to DO school because they fell in love with DO philosophy or ideas but because they wanted to go to med school and didn't get into MD schools and others who chose DO schools even over MD schools or did not apply MD because they had no desire to. Simple observation.

3. I made the notion that the applicant pool is different. I didn't say they were less intelligent or less smarter because of their scores. that is you putting words in my mouth. I said that they were a different applicant pool and that is truth. They are a different applicant pool. Not everyone who applies to MD schools applies to DO schools. A lot of those who are not the 4.0/40 MCAT types for the most part because it is not the more traditional route and most will not go against the grain of tradition. That does not mean I imply that a student is stupid. It means I imply that even if numbers are what a school is going on the averages are lower because a lot of people will not go against the grain of tradition who are in a position to choose whatever school they want.

Now what I DID NOT SAY was things about DPMS or DCs whatever the heck that is as I don't even know what DC stands for. So please don't jump on me and attack me and take everything out of context that I have stated. Please attack the people who actually did say that it was due to lack of intelligence that the averages were lower.

Though your post inspired me to chime in again, I wasn't even talking to you.

I agreed with your observation that a lot of non-trads choose DO over MD. I offered some of my own insights into why a non-trad might volitionally choose DO over MD - essentially that MD schools do not value non-trad experience, while non-trads themselves value it highly.

DC stands for Doctor of Chiropractic. I've known a bunch, and find that they have an interesting, supportive, self-improving mindset. When I was in medical school on my Surgery clerkship, I was assigned to a team headed by a podiatrist, for a day. Having done a number of orthopedic cases, as well as amputations with Vascular surgeons, I found that the Podiatry team had a very different way of teaching, and a way of interacting. They weren't so fond of the Socratic Method, rather they preferred a modeling/mirroring teaching method. One might experience working with a DO, DPM, or DC, and feel that they fit better with these people, more than the MDs.

 

[vickpick]

some people want to go to DO school from the get go...
And others want to go to MD school and get bad MCAT and apply to DO school with some MD schools...
Thats the truth of the Matter!!!

Keep D.O. as they are, atleast that gives some people with unfortuantely low MCAT/GPA a chance at medicine.

 

[willen101383]

I agreed with your observation that a lot of non-trads choose DO over MD. I offered some of my own insights into why a non-trad might volitionally choose DO over MD - essentially that MD schools do not value non-trad experience, while non-trads themselves value it highly.

.

Exactly. I graduated undergrad with a HORRIBLE GPA. I had no intention of going into medicine. But I graduated, and started working in my field (clinical lab medicine)....and after a few years realized I wanted med school. Got my masters and did shockingly well. But when you average 2 years worth of As with 4 years worth of Bs and Cs it really doesnt bring your GPA up much. I did end up getting an MD acceptance, but most MD schools simply said my cGPA wasnt high enough. They didnt care about the 7 or 8 years of clinical experience I have..or the fact that I am licensed in my field. They were too focused on grades I got when I was a teenager! They were not willing to break that down and see that I have like 75 credits of As in graduate level sciences. DO schools on the other hand were.

I actually PICKED DO over the MD school I got into because I am established where I am, I live with my girlfriend, she has a stable job here, and the potential "risk" of being a DO wasnt worth it...especially since I think the risk is nonexistant with the DO school I am going to.

 

[willen101383]

Yeah I had a few friends who had MD acceptances and DO acceptances and they liked the DO schools better so chose them over MD. Just felt more comfortable with the faculty, staff, and atmosphere of the school they chose.

Yeah...while I hate to paint all MD students with the same brush..because that isnt the case. But at the MD school I found students were more self centered etc. I hate the gunner mentality with a passion. I would rather be competitive in the physical realm...IE sports, gym, etc...and collaborative in my academic pursuits.

 

[Dissected]

Yeah...while I hate to paint all MD students with the same brush..because that isnt the case. But at the MD school I found students were more self centered etc. I hate the gunner mentality with a passion. I would rather be competitive in the physical realm...IE sports, gym, etc...and collaborative in my academic pursuits.

There's a lot of competitive people here. And there is always that underlying competition factor no matter who you hang out with. Its just the nature of the med school game, especially when there is a class rank. I hate class rank.

 

[willen101383]

There's a lot of competitive people here. And there is always that underlying competition factor no matter who you hang out with. Its just the nature of the med school game, especially when there is a class rank. I hate class rank.

Yeah. Some of the MD schools I visited seemed to be more "cutthroat" I guess I should say. I generally never tell anyone my grades. It is fun making people wonder about where you stand IMO.

 

[jumpingjax]

I think the system is fine the way it is. Those who can, go MD, those who can't go DO. Please don't give people BS about how you "chose" DO.

The nice thing is that the very, very top DO students (who take all steps of the USMLE and ace them) deserve the allopathic residency spots they get. I have no problem with that. Rock on. You've earned it.

The growing problematic trend I've seen is that the non-top 0.5% of DO students are now vying for competetive spots.

The vast majority of DO students (who were Allo rejects) feel they deserve spots in allopathic anesthesia/rads/ortho/derm etc programs even with subpar board scores. Ridiculous. They shouldn't even be allowed to apply.

If you choose to go DO, you should be content with primary care and rural medicine, unless you're in the top 0.5% or so and can prove yourself on the USMLE.

 

[Daedra22]

I think the system is fine the way it is. Those who can, go MD, those who can't go DO. Please don't give people BS about how you "chose" DO.

The nice thing is that the very, very top DO students (who take all steps of the USMLE and ace them) deserve the allopathic residency spots they get. I have no problem with that. Rock on. You've earned it.

The growing problematic trend I've seen is that the non-top 0.5% of DO students are now vying for competetive spots.

The vast majority of DO students (who were Allo rejects) feel they deserve spots in allopathic anesthesia/rads/ortho/derm etc programs even with subpar board scores. Ridiculous. They shouldn't even be allowed to apply.

If you choose to go DO, you should be content with primary care and rural medicine, unless you're in the top 0.5% or so and can prove yourself on the USMLE.

... how is it that only the top 1% of DO students should be allowed in allo residencies? Surely those who are not in the top 1% still score high enough to be competitive for other residencies. I think if a DO is competitive in an MD-only specialty (clinical genetics, for example) regardless of being in the "top 1%", they should get to apply for that residency. And they do. We are no longer limited to primary care because we can make the numbers to do other things, if we so choose.

 

[jumpingjax]

... how is it that only the top 1% of DO students should be allowed in allo residencies? Surely those who are not in the top 1% still score high enough to be competitive for other residencies. I think if a DO is competitive in an MD-only specialty (clinical genetics, for example) regardless of being in the "top 1%", they should get to apply for that residency. And they do. We are no longer limited to primary care because we can make the numbers to do other things, if we so choose.

That's cool too (USMLE).

I just don't llike the thought of a DO student slipping into an allo spot without taking the USMLE or with ultra low USMLE scores when several MD students (including a few of my old med school classmates) with average board scores didn't match.

 

[willen101383]

That's cool too (USMLE).

I just don't llike the thought of a DO student slipping into an allo spot without taking the USMLE or with ultra low USMLE scores when several MD students (including a few of my old med school classmates) with average board scores didn't match.

While I do not agree with some other things you said above...I do think it is complete BS that there is not a uniform match/MD students not being able to match into osteopathic residencies. DO students shouldnt be ousting better qualified MD candidates for spots..if what you mentioned above really did happen.

You make it seem like every DO student goes into primary care or rural medicine. Here in Philly, PCOM students are highly regarded, and are considered on par with the other medical schools here. And by taking a look at their match list you will see only 25%ish match into Family practice/primary care. I guess they all must have inside connections...since ya know...they all were underachievers on the boards as you hinted at above.

And it is not BS. I CHOSE a DO school over an MD school. I would rather stay in Philly, where my roots are, and go to PCOM....vs having to move to another area and force my girlfriend to set up shop again, etc.

 

[voitokas]

That's cool too (USMLE). I just don't llike the thought of a DO student slipping into an allo spot without taking the USMLE or with ultra low USMLE scores when several MD students (including a few of my old med school classmates) with average board scores didn't match.

I agree with that, and I'm a DO student. If you're not competitive for the position... I haven't taken the boards yet, but from reading review books, I don't think that the COMLEX and USMLE's are similar enough to not require the USMLE for those residencies. Students who have the ability but went DO because they lacked the numbers for MD should be able to score competitively on the USMLE regardless of what school they went to. And, on the other side, PD's should not discriminate against DO's with competitive USMLE scores.

 

[jvesco22]

While I do not agree with some other things you said above...I do think it is complete BS that there is not a uniform match/MD students not being able to match into osteopathic residencies. DO students shouldnt be ousting better qualified MD candidates for spots..if what you mentioned above really did happen.

You make it seem like every DO student goes into primary care or rural medicine. Here in Philly, PCOM students are highly regarded, and are considered on par with the other medical schools here. And by taking a look at their match list you will see only 25%ish match into Family practice/primary care. I guess they all must have inside connections...since ya know...they all were underachievers on the boards as you hinted at above.

And it is not BS. I CHOSE a DO school over an MD school. I would rather stay in Philly, where my roots are, and go to PCOM....vs having to move to another area and force my girlfriend to set up shop again, etc.

That's funny because judging from your stats(previous threads/posts) it seems you really didn't have that much of a choice

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=137389

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=420093

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=8705439&postcount=277

I normally don't do this but for you I'll make an exception. You keep trying to defend DO with your life as if you wanted to be a DO since the day you were born. The fact of the matter is you had VERY LIMITED options. I highly doubt you had a big selection of schools to choose from. You probably got accepted to 1 MD school(if any) that was in BFE and decided you'd rather stay close to home. But please, stop acting like you had a 4.0/45T and had your choice of 50 MD schools, but chose to go DO. You're lying to yourself...

 

[willen101383]

That's funny because judging from your stats(previous threads/posts) it seems you really didn't have that much of a choice

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=137389

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=420093

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=8705439&postcount=277

I normally don't do this but for you I'll make an exception. You keep trying to defend DO with your life as if you wanted to be a DO since the day you were born. The fact of the matter is you had VERY LIMITED options. I highly doubt you had a big selection of schools to choose from. You probably got accepted to 1 MD school(if any) that was in BFE and decided you'd rather stay close to home. But please, stop acting like you had a 4.0/45T and had your choice of 50 MD schools, but chose to go DO. You're lying to yourself...

You think I post my whole life up on SDN? I have a legacy at a US MD school. Its cool though. Did I say I was competitive at every MD school? You can keep talking $hit though. It is the internet and you are protected behind your monitor.
BTW....retook the mcat since that was posted.
Those other posts are yearsss old. I will be the first one to tell you I screwed up in undergrad...busted my ass in grad school and was successful. It is okay though thanks for pulling up threads I posted years ago..save for the last one

 

[jvesco22]

You think I post my whole life up on SDN? I have a legacy at a US MD school. Its cool though. Did I say I was competitive at every MD school? You can keep talking $hit though. It is the internet and you are protected behind your monitor. I think if we were face to face your big E nuts might retract a bit.

Exactly what I thought. You get called out, get defensive and now you start e-thuggin. If we were face to face, you'd get stomped on, so please stop trying to act hard...

On a lighter note, I'm glad you found a medical school that accepted you. Stop trying to be the DO's knight in shining armor. It gets old...

 

[willen101383]

.

 

[BassCaster]

Exactly what I thought. You get called out, get defensive and now you start e-thuggin. If we were face to face, you'd get stomped on, so please stop trying to act hard...

On a lighter note, I'm glad you found a medical school that accepted you. Stop trying to be the DO's knight in shining armor. It gets old...

lol, would that be an e-threat?