DO; to remain separate or merge with MD?

[HalfListic]

In an effort to stimulate some thought provoking discussion here, Id like to present this question that has been debated for a long time and continues to be a point of question among pre-meds, med students, physicians, etc.

As future DOs, its obviously important not only to know the history or Osteopathic medicine, but of all medicine. And not only to know the history, but to also put thought into how we will shape the future of medicine. Will you fight to absolve the DO degree and have the schools convert to allopathic? Or will you seek to distinguish DOs as peers in medicine and leaders in patient care? Or will you sit back and let others decide? Why?

So what do you think? I have an opinion on the matter that I will share after things get rolling so that I don't introduce any bias. ***One request is that we keep it professional and respectful. For the bulk of your comment, try to explain your opinion rather than critique other opinions. Keep it classy SDN *** (if possible, state if you are pre DO, MD, current student, or current physician)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[oms2]

in a nutshell, do = aoa (the american osteopathic association). as long as there is an aoa, not gonna happen.

 

[dntke1518]

in a nutshell, do = aoa (the american osteopathic association). as long as there is an aoa, not gonna happen.

+1 this

 

[Larynx]

Ultimately what I see happening in the future is that there will be two types of medical schools one applies to.

One type of medical school will be geared towards primary care training.
The other obviously for specialists.

It might happen that DO schools get converted to being these dedicated primary care training facilities along with some other current MD schools.

Of course maybe I also live in fantasy land.

 

[HalfListic]

in a nutshell, do = aoa (the american osteopathic association). as long as there is an aoa, not gonna happen.

If you think long term, anything can change...hence the existence of DO. So, I wonder if you have any desire to support either idea, or if you are choosing the third option (not wanting to deal with this particular issue), which is ok too.

 

[oms2]

Ultimately what I see happening in the future is that there will be two types of medical schools one applies to.

One type of medical school will be geared towards primary care training.
The other obviously for specialists.

It might happen that DO schools get converted to being these dedicated primary care training facilities along with some other current MD schools.

Of course maybe I also live in fantasy land.

that's not gonna happen either. the preclin curriculum and rotation schedule are identical whether a med school is "pc" or not, except of course do schools have omm and a few elite md schools like duke have a shorter preclin and require research.

 

[HalfListic]

that's not gonna happen either. the preclin curriculum and rotation schedule are identical whether a med school is "pc" or not, except of course do schools have omm and a few elite md schools like duke have a shorter preclin and require research.

you're right oms2, but this is more a place to state what you will fight for, or support. Its really easy to criticize other comments...add your own convictions to your comments. What do you want to happen?

 

[Mehd School]

in a nutshell, do = aoa (the american osteopathic association). as long as there is an aoa, not gonna happen.

I agree for the most part.

However, if allo residencies were cut off, it would put DO's in quite a pickle. I doubt this will happen, but you can never be 100% sure of anything.

 

[GimpGenius]

 

[oms2]

no i actually have no problem with the do degree. i haven't met any do student who loses sleep over it either. it's a piece of paper - means to an end - i couldn't care less if they called it zz instead of do. i do have a problem with the aoa. they should (a) allow only non-profit schools, (b) get rid of the outdated cranial stuff that pollutes the omm textbook, (c) work out a treaty with the ama to get more dual accredited residencies and open the competitive aoa residencies to md students (and let them take omm) in exchange for acgme folks doing the same thing dor do students, (d) get rid of the stupid do licensing rules in the 4 states that are punitive to people who didn't do an aoa residency. anyways i am neutral about the degree thing.

 

[oms2]

I agree for the most part.

However, if allo residencies were cut off, it would put DO's in quite a pickle. I doubt this will happen, but you can never be 100% sure of anything.

unlikely. the political outcry would be enormous. remember there are several populous states that have public do schools.

 

[dntke1518]

no i actually have no problem with the do degree. i haven't met any do student who loses sleep over it either. it's a piece of paper - means to an end - i couldn't care less if they called it zz instead of do. i do have a problem with the aoa. they should (a) allow only non-profit schools, (b) get rid of the outdated cranial stuff that pollutes the omm textbook, (c) work out a treaty with the ama to get more dual accredited residencies and open the competitive aoa residencies to md students (and let them take omm) in exchange for acgme folks doing the same thing dor do students, (d) get rid of the stupid do licensing rules in the 4 states that are punitive to people who didn't do an aoa residency. anyways i am neutral about the degree thing.

Well put sir/ma'am. Maybe someday that will all be a reality, we can only hope.

 

[HalfListic]

no i actually have no problem with the do degree. i haven't met any do student who loses sleep over it either. it's a piece of paper - means to an end - i couldn't care less if they called it zz instead of do. i do have a problem with the aoa. they should (a) allow only non-profit schools, (b) get rid of the outdated cranial stuff that pollutes the omm textbook, (c) work out a treaty with the ama to get more dual accredited residencies and open the competitive aoa residencies to md students (and let them take omm) in exchange for acgme folks doing the same thing dor do students, (d) get rid of the stupid do licensing rules in the 4 states that are punitive to people who didn't do an aoa residency. anyways i am neutral about the degree thing.

great answer. Those are some real changes that can be made and maybe we can actually help make it possible.

Three major points I agree with are updating OMM (and validating its utility with research/clinical trial), bilaterally opening residencies, reforming licensing regulation. I also agree that the DO degree has little significance in medical practice, negative or positive. But it can have philosophical significance. For example, most people associate DO with OMM. This should not be the case! Right or wrong, OMM was a medical intervention created as a reaction to a perceived deviation in patient centered care. Is it still valid? I think so, but I want it to be validated scientifically and objectively and modified if needed.

Therefore, DOs shouldn't be associated with OMM alone, but with thinking differently and constantly questioning tradition. We should be the ones who are open to new procedure, treatment and patient care...but it should remain in the confines of peer reviewed, scientific trial. This is where dual accreditation could come into play.

If the DO isn't different, why should it even exist?

 

[cel2016]

Really, with only philosophical differences I see no need for two separate degrees and titles. I will be happy to be a licensed physician and keep my philosophies regardless of which training regimen I went through - though I did choose to apply DO because I find it a better fit with my mentality. I think the training and use of OMM is a very minor difference (as many DOs don't use it in practice anyway, and if an MD wanted to they could train in it as well). As such, I suppose it would make my life easier not to have to keep explaining what a DO is and justifying my path to family and friends who don't understand.

That being said - while I have no problems with a merger, I would not spend my time and effort fighting for one.

Also, I'm matriculating this year (class of 2016) so I will see if/how my thoughts on this change in the years ahead.

 

[oms2]

If the DO isn't different, why should it even exist?

do is an old degree. it has existed for a long time.
don't discount the pride and emotional attachment especially among the older do's. it's american history. nostalgia. it's a piece of heartland americana. the aoa. remember if you read the do book there is a broad swath of america where for decades do's delivered babies and took care of families, and there were osteopathic hospitals all over the u.s., (the most recent batch to go under was in west texas or texas panhandle i believe.)

 

[HalfListic]

Really, with only philosophical differences I see no need for two separate degrees and titles. I will be happy to be a licensed physician and keep my philosophies regardless of which training regimen I went through - though I did choose to apply DO because I find it a better fit with my mentality. I think the training and use of OMM is a very minor difference (as many DOs don't use it in practice anyway, and if an MD wanted to they could train in it as well). As such, I suppose it would make my life easier not to have to keep explaining what a DO is and justifying my path to family and friends who don't understand.

That being said - while I have no problems with a merger, I would not spend my time and effort fighting for one.

Also, I'm matriculating this year (class of 2016) so I will see if/how my thoughts on this change in the years ahead.

Thanks for your response...and good luck this year!

do is an old degree. it has existed for a long time.
don't discount the pride and emotional attachment especially among the older do's. it's american history. nostalgia. it's a piece of heartland americana. the aoa. remember if you read the do book there is a broad swath of america where for decades do's delivered babies and took care of families, and there were osteopathic hospitals all over the u.s., (the most recent batch to go under was in west texas or texas panhandle i believe.)

Thats right, DOs are a great part of history. Maybe you didn't see this, but I actually am advocating not only to keep the DO degree, but to revitalize it.

I ask, why should DO exist, not to say they shouldn't...but to help people remember why it should!

Osteopathic medicine has the potential to be much more than nostalgia. It can still be a way to revitalize medicine and stimulate better patient care and community service. I think most people will get their degree and just practice medicine without further thought to what they can do to do to enhance modern medicine. I hope that at least a few will continue to think about new ideas and challenge old ideas...and I think this is a responsibility especially of the DO.

Primary care is changing. Look at PA's, Chiropractors and LPNs...they are active in increasing their roles in patient care. Are we? Specialty care is changing. Are DOs even competing to be a part of this movement? Wouldn't a DO background be a perfect foundation for any surgeon, psychiatrist, or oncologist, etc?

Are we going to influence medicine or not?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

unlikely. the political outcry would be enormous. remember there are several populous states that have public do schools.

Public DO schools have OPTI's that are big enough to protect their students and they can negotiate within their state to make sure their students have adequate residencies. Small private and newer schools not only are at risk of being screwed in this situation, they will be screwed regardless by 2018-2020 when there will be simply way too many US graduates and not enough residencies DO or MD.

 

[NeuroLAX]

I bet a lot of people have seen this, but I'll post it here anyway. The resolution that was written by DO students and DOs for changing to MD,DO: http://eyedrd.org/2010/12/resolution-calling-for-degree.html

Who else would support a switch to MD, DO (Doctor of Medicine, Diplomate of Osteopathy)?

As others have stated, the AOA will not allow this to happen. But instead of the AOA being put through the guillotine, how about changing it to the American Academy/Association of Osteopathic Diplomats?

EDIT: As this topic as been discussed before, I think it is only appropriate to provide links to a few of them (I'm sure there are many more):
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=372094
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=520719
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=798250

 

[HalfListic]

I bet a lot of people have seen this, but I'll post it here anyway. The resolution that was written by DO students and DOs for changing to MD,DO: http://eyedrd.org/2010/12/resolution-calling-for-degree.html

Who else would support a switch to MD, DO (Doctor of Medicine, Diplomate of Osteopathy)?

As others have stated, the AOA will not allow this to happen. But instead of the AOA being put through the guillotine, how about changing it to the American Academy/Association of Osteopathic Diplomats?

EDIT: As this topic as been discussed before, I think it is only appropriate to provide links to a few of them (I'm sure there are many more):
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=372094
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=520719
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=798250

Thank you for this...GREAT information! I want to re read that MD, DO article...but in theory it seems like a nice solution.

edit: I'd like to add that many, if not all, successful movements to change have come after several 'defeats'. Im glad to see the quality of work done by this group. Those are very well organized and thought out points of contention.

 

[UCFKnight]

IMO, I think there will be a merge within the next ~30 years, and I am personally willing to fight for it. I think OMT/OPP should be an elective for a generalized medical school. Personally, I just love medicine, and I hate seeing professionals of the same practice/field being distinct from one another because of the name of their degree. Ultimately, the curriculum is all the same, and there are without a doubt DO students that are 'smarter' than MD students (and vice versa, obviously). It really is a huge point of contention, and I'm sure there will be people here that will strongly disagree with me. to answer your question, I will fight for a merge.

If I get into NSU over any of the 21 MD programs I applied to, I will without a doubt choose NSU. I'll be happier, and I have witnessed the benefits of OMT.

 

[Wolverines83]

DO student here:

Don't care about the letters after my name. Don't have patience for politicians or politics (ahem...AOA/AMA) or for any physician who finds it necessary to question the minute differences between the two degrees.

They can change my degree to FU for all I care; I'm gonna worry about my patients.

 

[user3]

Public DO schools have OPTI's that are big enough to protect their students and they can negotiate within their state to make sure their students have adequate residencies. Small private and newer schools not only are at risk of being screwed in this situation, they will be screwed regardless by 2018-2020 when there will be simply way too many US graduates and not enough residencies DO or MD.

FWIW...There will be just over 26,000 US grads in 2017. There are currently about 26,000 MD and 2,000 DO residencies offered each year (plus around 750 that do military residencies).

Check back on July 1 to see if the proposed changes for COCA standards passed.

 

[HalfListic]

DO student here:

Don't care about the letters after my name. Don't have patience for politicians or politics (ahem...AOA/AMA) or for any physician who finds it necessary to question the minute differences between the two degrees.

They can change my degree to FU for all I care; I'm gonna worry about my patients.

Good feedback from a current student. I wonder if you think that your DO background will provide you with any differences (advantages, disadvantages, responsibilities, philosophies) to the MD grads? I know some student don't think so.

FWIW...There will be just over 26,000 US grads in 2017. There are currently about 26,000 MD and 2,000 DO residencies offered each year (plus around 750 that do military residencies).

Check back on July 1 to see if the proposed changes for COCA standards passed.

+1

 

[Wolverines83]

Good feedback from a current student. I wonder if you think that your DO background will provide you with any differences (advantages, disadvantages, responsibilities, philosophies) to the MD grads? I know some student don't think so.

I don't think a degree is what makes the difference between two practitioners. I think it's an individual basis. Like a lot of people said, they sometimes don't know they've been treated by a DO until they look them up. That, to me at least, is proof/evidence that DO schools don't turn out inherently different physicians than MD schools.

A physician I worked with said he sees more variation from person to person than from MD to DO. He said he's seen MDs who are more holistic than DOs and vice versa; both MDs and DOs who don't know their anal sphincter from their nose. It's all about how you choose to conduct yourself and your career, he said.

My degree provides me with the opportunity to legally practice medicine. Everything after that is, in my opinion, a result of my personal choices and philosophies and not necessarily something inherently osteopathic instilled in me during school.

With all of that said, I don't see a need to change the degree to MD. I mean really, it's just letters. If an osteopathic school changes it's name and eliminates the word "osteopathic" and then awards MDs without changing the faculty (it wouldn't; why would a board of directors agree to fire itself?), what's the difference? It's the same education.

If there is one thing I take issue with, it's the apparent resistance of the DO establishment to critically evaluate the efficacy/mechanism of OMM. Like it or not, we live in a world that values the scientific method. It would lend so much more credibility to the degree if the AOA came out and said "Hey, we looked at cranial and upon further review and investigation have found that it's crap. We therefore withdraw our support for it and will no longer teach it." "We also reviewed modality X and concluded that it does, in fact, work. Here is the mechanism."

I don't want to get ridiculous with OMM as that's not the topic of this thread. But the continued teaching of cranial reduces the credibility to some of the more critical eyes.

Check back on July 1 to see if the proposed changes for COCA standards passed.

elaborate?

 

[HalfListic]

Like a lot of people said, they sometimes don't know they've been treated by a DO until they look them up. That, to me at least, is proof/evidence that DO schools don't turn out inherently different physicians than MD schools.

I wonder if we can change this? Or if anyone else wants to? I, for one, would love to see two things continue to happen. One, continued mutual respect and cooperation between MDs and DOs. And two, for DOs to distinguish themselves in the public eye. I feel like we could be seen as a slightly different kind of physician.

An example from the business world that I think has some interesting parallels is Apple, inc. Apple has established itself as a fundamentally different type of technology business. At first, IBM was the giant and no one but the crazy cult apple fan boys showed any interest or respect for Apple computers. But, Apple remained true to its focus on high quality product and customer service. Its now the most respected brand in the world. People still agree that you can still find a good computer in a Mac or a PC, a growing number of people enjoy the innovation, leadership and quality of product that Apple gives.

Now, I don't want to discuss whether Apple is better than any PC or vice versa...this is just used as a metaphor to what I believe the 'brand' DO could be, what I hope it will be. As a DO, I want to be able to offer everything modern medicine has to give...but I also want to complement my care with an added measure of patient education, community public health education and disease prevention, and maybe even extra services such as OMM (though I too want this practice to be renovated and verified), diet and exercise plans and solutions for increased wellness. DO could be synonymous with getting something a little something extra.

Of course, as many have pointed out, nothing stops an MD from doing the same thing...but the branding would be there and that brand would help improve patient care and wellness.

 

[UCFKnight]

I'm loving everything that Wolverines is saying. I wholeheartedly agree, and I highly doubt my views will ever change. Good insight Wolverines!

 

[sylvanthus]

Merge and offer an OMT certificate to every medical student wanting the additional education.

 

[HalfListic]

With all of that said, I don't see a need to change the degree to MD. I mean really, it's just letters. If an osteopathic school changes it's name and eliminates the word "osteopathic" and then awards MDs without changing the faculty (it wouldn't; why would a board of directors agree to fire itself?), what's the difference? It's the same education.

One more point Id like to explore here, I don't think that faculty would need to change. As it is, there are many MDs who are faculty at DO schools and, like you point out, its the same education.

Also, I agree with actually everything you say at the level of the practicing physician. Letters are letters and an education is an education. People will always choose how they behave and MDs and DOs will be on both sides of every issue and at varying degrees of intelligence and altruism.

But, as an institution or organization, different letters denotes a difference. So, I feel like we either need to account for the difference and embrace it, get rid of it, or combine it as in MD, DO combined degree...which is very interesting and compelling as an option. After all, isn't every description of Osteopathic education basically, its the same medical education as MDs, plus extra Osteopathic training, hence: MD, DO. Kinda makes sense...

 

[donkeykong1]

NO.
1. Keep the degrees separate.

2. Just make all residencies, which are government subsidized no less under medicare, dually accredited (ACGME/AOA).

3. COCA should stop accrediting for-profit schools

4. COCA should open a pgy spot for every new seat opened up

 

[deleted103644]

ACGME should close off all residencies to DO graduates and schools should be forced to convert or die.

OMM is an embarrassment.

 

[donkeykong1]

ACGME should close off all residencies to DO graduates and schools should be forced to convert or die.

OMM is an embarrassment.

You're an embarrasment
On the question about allowing MDs in AOA residnecies:

“Should we allow MDs into OGME
programs? Yes,” began Kendall Reed,
DO, the dean of the Des Moines (Iowa)
University—College of Osteopathic
Medicine.
“How can we possibly defend two
standards of graduate medical education in this country?” he asked, referring to how DO graduates can serve
residencies accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical
Education (ACGME) while MD graduates cannot serve AOA-approved
internships and residencies."

page 25
http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/pdf/pub_do0208training.pdf

 

[donkeykong1]

and then there's the opposite response:

"William D. Strampel, DO,
urged summit participants
not to support opening
OGME p r o g r ams t o
MD graduates.
"Ever since A.T. Still
articulated osteopathic
philosophy, we have been
a p r o f e s s i o n t h a t i s
u n i q u e , " i n s i s t e d Dr
Strampel, the dean of the
Michigan State University College of Osteopathic
Medicine in East Lansing.
"This is not a profession
that is based on our being
just like MDs but ..."
"When you define yourself by another profession, you have immediately
weakened your position," he argued.
"We insult our profession when we allow
our students and ourselves to define
osteopathic physicians in this way."
"If our programs admit MDs, who
will board-certify these physicians?" Dr
Strampel asked. "If you put MDs in
these programs, you'd better certify them.
"And you'd have to let them join
the AOA. If MDs join the AOA, you're
not just letting them pay
their money: You have to
let them vote."
This would be the "death
knell" for osteopathic medicine's distinctiveness, Dr
Strampel insisted.
"Manual medicine is not
osteopathic medicine," he argued.
"Osteopathic medicine is a distinct
philosophy, a distinct profession, and
it always will be. We need to continue to act like we believe this."

page26
http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/pdf/pub_do0208training.pdf

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

NO.
1. Keep the degrees separate.

2. Just make all residencies, which are government subsidized no less under medicare, dually accredited (ACGME/AOA).

3. COCA should stop accrediting for-profit schools

4. COCA should open a pgy spot for every new seat opened up

I think that DO schools should likewise be dual accredited under LCME. and that during the match process a students school is not included on the application as long as it is an mainland school.

 

[donkeykong1]

I think that DO schools should likewise be dual accredited under LCME. and that during the match process a students school is not included on the application as long as it is an mainland school.

i don't think the latter will ever be possible. the former is decades away.

 

[HalfListic]

I think that DO schools should likewise be dual accredited under LCME. and that during the match process a students school is not included on the application as long as it is an mainland school.

This is a great thought.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

i don't think the latter will ever be possible. the former is decades away.

Well then you'll always have stronger md programs discriminating against DO's.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

and then there's the opposite response:

"William D. Strampel, DO,
urged summit participants
not to support opening
OGME p r o g r ams t o
MD graduates.
“Ever since A.T. Still
articulated osteopathic
philosophy, we have been
a p r o f e s s i o n t h a t i s
u n i q u e , ” i n s i s t e d Dr
Strampel, the dean of the
Michigan State University College of Osteopathic
Medicine in East Lansing.
“This is not a profession
that is based on our being
just like MDs but ...”
“When you define yourself by another profession, you have immediately
weakened your position,” he argued.
“We insult our profession when we allow
our students and ourselves to define
osteopathic physicians in this way.”
“If our programs admit MDs, who
will board-certify these physicians?” Dr
Strampel asked. “If you put MDs in
these programs, you’d better certify them.
“And you’d have to let them join
the AOA. If MDs join the AOA, you’re
not just letting them pay
their money: You have to
let them vote.”
This would be the “death
knell” for osteopathic medicine’s distinctiveness, Dr
Strampel insisted.
“Manual medicine is not
osteopathic medicine,” he argued.
“Osteopathic medicine is a distinct
philosophy, a distinct profession, and
it always will be. We need to continue to act like we believe this."

page26
http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/pdf/pub_do0208training.pdf

This guy is a tool.

 

[HalfListic]

I bet a lot of people have seen this, but I'll post it here anyway. The resolution that was written by DO students and DOs for changing to MD,DO: http://eyedrd.org/2010/12/resolution-calling-for-degree.html

Who else would support a switch to MD, DO (Doctor of Medicine, Diplomate of Osteopathy)?

As others have stated, the AOA will not allow this to happen. But instead of the AOA being put through the guillotine, how about changing it to the American Academy/Association of Osteopathic Diplomats?

EDIT: As this topic as been discussed before, I think it is only appropriate to provide links to a few of them (I'm sure there are many more):
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=372094
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=520719
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=798250

In case people didn't see this...good info to consider

 

[sylvanthus]

Changing the title to some hybrid is a terrible idea imo. Get rid of DO entirely or make it into a more respected degree with a legitimate difference from MDs.

 

[sylvanthus]

Ugh the MD,DO thing really bugs me its pretty much tacking our degree onto MD to make it sound legit but also different. It is seriously a ***** move.

 

[MedPR]

no i actually have no problem with the do degree. i haven't met any do student who loses sleep over it either. it's a piece of paper - means to an end - i couldn't care less if they called it zz instead of do. i do have a problem with the aoa. they should (a) allow only non-profit schools, (b) get rid of the outdated cranial stuff that pollutes the omm textbook, (c) work out a treaty with the ama to get more dual accredited residencies and open the competitive aoa residencies to md students (and let them take omm) in exchange for acgme folks doing the same thing dor do students, (d) get rid of the stupid do licensing rules in the 4 states that are punitive to people who didn't do an aoa residency. anyways i am neutral about the degree thing.

+infinity.

DO/MD should be just like BA/BS. Absolutely no different except for a few different classes that end up being meaningless/redundant in the big picture.

 

[donkeykong1]

Changing the title to some hybrid is a terrible idea imo. Get rid of DO entirely or make it into a more respected degree with a legitimate difference from MDs.

see i think we're going about this the wrong way. there are 3 different layers to medical education in the US.

a) undergraduate medical education (2yrs in class, 2yrs in clinical sites)

b) graduate medical education (internships, residencies, fellowships)

c) continuing medical education (keeping certification and licensure)

Now where MDs arguable most differ from DOs is in the first level, since OMM is infused into the pre-clinical as well as usually a single rotation during the clinical years.

the osteopathic philosophy and whatnot wains away immensely in the second and third levels to a point where it becomes non-existent (unless one is training in NMM exclusively).

the purpose of GME and CME both under the MD and DO umbrella is the same. its to become a highly qualified physician in the particular specialty. OMM or the osteopathic philosophy really does not add as much to the training as does getting exposure to the latest treatments, procedures, pathology, research..as a result i see no reason for their not to be a fusion of the MD and DO domains in GME and CME.

the focus of preserving the history and separate identity of the DO degree should be limited to the first level only. expand undergrad OMM fellowships for those interested. and restrict OMM to evidence based treatments.

 

[HalfListic]

Ugh the MD,DO thing really bugs me its pretty much tacking our degree onto MD to make it sound legit but also different. It is seriously a ***** move.

Hmmm, maybe you could explain further?

In reality, is the DO degree an MD education with extra training "tacked" onto it? You describe it like thats a bad thing, but Im not sure why. If you read that article its not to legitimize the degree, but to more accurately describe it.

Remember, I actually like the distinction of DO, but I am open to improving ideas and distinctions.

 

[sylvanthus]

No, we are either different or we are the same. We can't continue to be both. That makes us look ******ed.

 

[COMedic2Doc]

Personally, I'm for keeping the degrees separate.

I really hate when pre-meds start getting panicked over things like residency without even getting into school. I am a huge fan of concentrating on the next step, i.e. getting into medical school and then worrying about the step after that. Hospitals know that there is a huge physician shortage looming and imho they will address this with the AGME, AOA, and AMA. Just my .02.

 

[deleted103644]

Changing the title to some hybrid is a terrible idea imo. Get rid of DO entirely or make it into a more respected degree with a legitimate difference from MDs.

 

[HalfListic]

+infinity.

DO/MD should be just like BA/BS. Absolutely no different except for a few different classes that end up being meaningless/redundant in the big picture.

Hey MedPR, glad you joined the discussion.

I want to challenge this idea though. The BA/BS is a differentiation of studying art v science. There is a pretty significant difference here, but there is no additional work done by either bachelors student.

MD and DO degree is essentially taught on the same level in the same way in comparable MD/DO schools. The DO program just adds a little DO history and OMM training. In this light, DO is closer to MD/MPH (or one of the other various dual degree programs) is it not? Its a medical degree with added training and focus.

So, by my view of how things are taught, if you keep MD and DO separate, DO school must be fundamentally different than MD school in their basic training, which they are not (nor would I want them to be).

Since that wont happen, it seems logical that you either have to recognize the duality of the DO programs, being a basic medical education, with an addition of DO philosophy and practice and award a degree the same way you would someone who got a basic medical education plus the addition of public health (MD/MPH) or law (MD/JD) or business (MD/MBA).

You wouldn't award an MD/JD something like DL (doctor of Law?) So why Doctor of Osteopathy? We are medical Doctors, with Osteopathic training and philosophy.

 

[sylvanthus]

When you actually start medical school you will soon realize the "philosophy" is largely BS and the additional training you receive is at expense of other things and is questionable at best. Yes, my school taught us some OMT, when actually researching it alot of it was essentially worthless. We also got really really poor micro training.

There is only so much time and adding something generally comes at the expense of something else. So, no I don't thing MD + more is what our training is, nor do I think we deserve an MD title + DO. I think that is insulting and misleading.

Again we are either different or the same, we are not a hybrid that is better and above and beyond.

 

[H Y F R]

Soooo, there actually is a considerable difference between BA and BS. But the difference is not as pronounced between MD/DO, so this example isn't great.

Is this now the de facto MD vs DO thread?

 

[Sileni]

You're an embarrasment
On the question about allowing MDs in AOA residnecies:

“Should we allow MDs into OGME
programs? Yes,” began Kendall Reed,
DO, the dean of the Des Moines (Iowa)
University—College of Osteopathic
Medicine.
“How can we possibly defend two
standards of graduate medical education in this country?” he asked, referring to how DO graduates can serve
residencies accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical
Education (ACGME) while MD graduates cannot serve AOA-approved
internships and residencies."

page 25
http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/pdf/pub_do0208training.pdf

The problem is... MDs aren't going to want the AOA residency slots. As much as I disagree with johnnydrama's superiority complex - he's right about one thing. Most of the AOA residencies are poor at best (I'm being SUPER generous here). I'm in Michigan, and honestly a lot of the residencies *that aren't AOA/ACGME dual accredited* are at community hospitals in the middle of nowhere. The "prestigous" AOA residencies of which a lot are at Botsford Hospital are also kind of a joke, especially because Botsford isn't well respected here in SE Michigan. And by isn't well respected, I mean the general consensus is that it's the worst "large" hospital in SE Michigan. Opening up the AOA residencies to MD students, while a nice gesture doesn't accomplish anything.