DO vs. MD question

[jennkhoho]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Why is it not as competitve to get into DO schools?

 

[FutureDocDO]

Why is it not as competitve to get into DO schools?

IMO, because most "competitive" people tend to choose MD over DO schools.

Congrats on your acceptance to MSUCOM. I know it's the only school you applied to so it must be a relief to know that you're in this early in the game.

 

[OSUdoc08]

Why is it not as competitve to get into DO schools?

Because MD schools generally discriminate based on MCAT and GPA scores.

DO schools tend to take other parts of the application into consideration, to determine who would make a good physician. (There is more to a physician than grades and test scores.) Recommendations, experiences, and other factors are given more weight. MD schools won't even try to get to know you at an interview unless you meet their specific score standards. They don't take into account factors that may have occurred in your life that could have affected these numbers. This is why you will find more non-traditional students at osteopathic schools.

 

[atrovariousg]

I think that there is a certain prestige that comes with the MD behind your name and that most of that prestige comes with getting into a more competitive school.

I also believe that there is a pungent arrogance that comes along with that prestige.

Why is it harder to get into Harvard than your local state school? Which of the two produces the most qualified docs?

"You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library." Good Will Hunting

 

[DODO]

I think that there is a certain prestige that comes with the MD behind your name and that most of that prestige comes with getting into a more competitive school.

I also believe that there is a pungent arrogance that comes along with that prestige.

Why is it harder to get into Harvard than your local state school? Which of the two produces the most qualified docs?

"You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library." Good Will Hunting

Good Movie 😉

 

[jennkhoho]

IMO, because most "competitive" people tend to choose MD over DO schools.

Congrats on your acceptance to MSUCOM. I know it's the only school you applied to so it must be a relief to know that you're in this early in the game.

Thanks FutureDocDO! It is a relief to know this early what I am doing next year. One of the girls that goes to MSUCOM right now got the call TWO WEEKS before orientation started as she was on the wait list. Eek!

Also, I agree with the idea that most people think that being an MD is "better" and comes along with that is arrogance. After visiting some MD and DO schools, regardless of my stats, I only wanted to apply a DO school and MSUCOM was the lucky one. The atmosphere is much more my style. 😎

 

[FutureDocDO]

People (MD students) tend to blindly ignore that fact that their low-tier schools (e.g., Howard, Meharry, etc...) do accept people with low numbers as well, even if it's not done on a consistent basis. Even Harvard accepts some people with low stats.

 

[medhacker]

People (MD students) tend to blindly ignore that fact that their low-tier schools (e.g., Brown, Meharry, etc...) do accept people with low numbers as well, even if it's not done on a consistent basis. Even Harvard accepts some people with low stats.

Brown does?

 

[FutureDocDO]

Brown does?

Sorry. Mistaken Brown for Howard.

 

[Pewl]

My reasons for choosing MD over DO simply have to do with residencies. My area of graduate study was in radiation oncology and radiological sciences and I really want to get into a radiation oncology or diagnostic radiology residency. I have spoken to my professors and I personally know the chairman of UCLA's rad onc and he told me that unfortunately there is a heavy bias against DO's in rad onc. It's really unfortunate that this bias exists, but it's there. I just don't want any additional hurdles in my pursuit for this. Otherwise, I really have nothing against osteopathy. If anything, they get a more complete education than MD's =P

 

[alphahelix]

Would a MD from a Caribbean still be prestigous as one from the US? I've heard a lot of graduates from Ross or St.George getting into good residencies program.

 

[jonb12997]

Would a MD from a Caribbean still be prestigous as one from the US? I've heard a lot of graduates from Ross or St.George getting into good residencies program.

I know I'll get argued with on this, but IMO, the short answer to your question is: No.

 

[DD214_DOC]

I think it has more to do with brand recognition, as a MD degree represents the "status quo" and the DO is probably considered subpar simply because it isn't. While that obviously isn't true as both are equivelant, being more recognizable confers some intrinsic value to the MD.

It's the same in business. People may prefer Aquafina water over Sam's Choice water simply because Aquafina is more recognizable and has more prestige than Sam's Choice, although both will quench your thirst. It's just recognition.

The popular medical shows aren't "House, DO" and, "Doogie Howser, DO" for a reason.

As far as the Carib degree being less pretigious, I think it depends upon whose perspective you analyze. From someone in the field who knows you went there, then probably not. From John Patient and anyone else who simply sees the two letters after your name, then probably.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

Would a MD from a Caribbean still be prestigous as one from the US? I've heard a lot of graduates from Ross or St.George getting into good residencies program.

no, a caribbean md would not be as prestigious as a us md. that doesn't mean you can get a great residency coming from the caribbean or be a successful physician. as for the merits of a caribbean md versus a do, well, we could go on forever about that one.

 

[gogo110182]

Foreign and Carribean graduates have ~50% in obtaining an allopathic residency in US. DOs have ~70%, and MDs have ~90%. However, DOs also have osteopathic match, and that eventually puts DOs as equivalent as MDs when comes to obtaining a residency. Detailed stats are available on NRMP.org

 

[DD214_DOC]

Foreign and Carribean graduates have ~50% in obtaining an allopathic residency in US. DOs have ~70%, and MDs have ~90%. However, DOs also have osteopathic match, and that eventually puts DOs as equivalent as MDs when comes to obtaining a residency. Detailed stats are available on NRMP.org

Keep in mind, that 50% includes the less reputable schools. AUC, Ross, and SGU had placement percentages similar to DO and USMD.

 

[Shodddy18]

Sorry. Mistaken Brown for Howard.

was that a freudian slip?

 

[JakeHarley]

Because MD schools generally discriminate based on MCAT and GPA scores.

DO schools tend to take other parts of the application into consideration, to determine who would make a good physician. (There is more to a physician than grades and test scores.) Recommendations, experiences, and other factors are given more weight. MD schools won't even try to get to know you at an interview unless you meet their specific score standards. They don't take into account factors that may have occurred in your life that could have affected these numbers. This is why you will find more non-traditional students at osteopathic schools.

I disagree with this assertion. This post implies that DO schools purposefully choose applicants with lower GPA and MCAT scores. I believe that they choose to look at an applicants extenuating circumstances only because they HAVE to in order to fill up their class--people with high GPAs and MCATS aren't applying! If they do, they are invariably offered a seat--which they almost always turn down to go to an MD school.

The ONLY reason DO schools are less competitive is because fewer folks with stellar academic backrounds apply. Why? Because people are herd animals, they generally want to do what everyone else is doing (earn the MD.)

I would like to point out, however, that I don't believe a DO program can't train physicians just as well as an MD program. We all have to pass the same boards, we all have to obtain a residency...these are the things that show wether or not we can really handle the material and practice--not GPA and MCAT scores.

Another qualifier: I will probably chose DO over MD this season, but it is definitely difficult to put that "herd animal" mentality aside for once in my life.

 

[wolfram241]

****

 

[JakeHarley]

Not sure about this. Aren't DO schools looking for a more caring person (i.e. does more clinical work etc).

Yes, but so are MDs--its just that the pool of "caring" DO applicants happens to have much lower average GPA and MCATs. I know some people will argue this with me. We would like to believe that DOs are so much more warm and fuzzy than MDs because many of us need something to feel good about the choice of program we made.

Let's say you have solid stats (3.6, 30), but little clinical experience.... Will DO schools accept you just to bring up their stats, or reject you because you don't *fit* into a DO program.

You are going to have a hard time at both DO and MD programs with little clinical experience. But I'll tell you, from personal experience, if you go into a DO interview with stats like that, they are chomping at the bit to find something they like about you!



I just want to reiterate my point from before: I don't believe there is truly anything wrong with DO training over MD training. I just think that if we believe DO programs are less competetive to get into for any reason other than lower average applicant stats, then we are deluding ourselves.

 

[drgreeneatutk]

I disagree with this assertion. This post implies that DO schools purposefully choose applicants with lower GPA and MCAT scores. I believe that they choose to look at an applicants extenuating circumstances only because they HAVE to in order to fill up their class--people with high GPAs and MCATS aren't applying! If they do, they are invariably offered a seat--which they almost always turn down to go to an MD school.

The ONLY reason DO schools are less competitive is because fewer folks with stellar academic backrounds apply. Why? Because people are herd animals, they generally want to do what everyone else is doing (earn the MD.)

I would like to point out, however, that I don't believe a DO program can't train physicians just as well as an MD program. We all have to pass the same boards, we all have to obtain a residency...these are the things that show wether or not we can really handle the material and practice--not GPA and MCAT scores.

Another qualifier: I will probably chose DO over MD this season, but it is definitely difficult to put that "herd animal" mentality aside for once in my life.

I'm going to have to agree with jakeharley on this one. Information on this is easily obtainable at aamc.org and aacom.org
DO average applicant numbers: (matriculating student #'s in brakets)
MCAT 23.8 [24.6]
S-GPA 3.25 [3.36]
NS-GPA 3.5 [3.54]
Overall GPA 3.38 [3.45]
MD average applicant numbers:
MCAT 27.3 [29.9]
S-GPA 3.36 [3.56]
NS-GPA 3.60 [3.70]
Overall GPA 3.47 [3.62]
I am perfectly confident that when I attend a DO school I will recieve the education I need to be a good doc (assuming I put in all the work that is required of me...which I will), but the numbers don't lie. the MD applicant pool is more academically qualified (at least numericallly speaking) than the DO applicant pool. Not saying there aren't those 3.7, 30+ that don't choose DO or only apply DO, but on average that's just not the case from what I can read into these stats

 

[drgreeneatutk]

I disagree with this assertion. This post implies that DO schools purposefully choose applicants with lower GPA and MCAT scores. I believe that they choose to look at an applicants extenuating circumstances only because they HAVE to in order to fill up their class--people with high GPAs and MCATS aren't applying! If they do, they are invariably offered a seat--which they almost always turn down to go to an MD school.

The ONLY reason DO schools are less competitive is because fewer folks with stellar academic backrounds apply. Why? Because people are herd animals, they generally want to do what everyone else is doing (earn the MD.)

I would like to point out, however, that I don't believe a DO program can't train physicians just as well as an MD program. We all have to pass the same boards, we all have to obtain a residency...these are the things that show wether or not we can really handle the material and practice--not GPA and MCAT scores.

Another qualifier: I will probably chose DO over MD this season, but it is definitely difficult to put that "herd animal" mentality aside for once in my life.

I'm going to have to agree with jakeharley on this one. Information on this is easily obtainable at aamc.org and aacom.org
DO average applicant numbers: (matriculating student #'s in brakets)
MCAT 23.8 [24.6]
S-GPA 3.25 [3.36]
NS-GPA 3.5 [3.54]
Overall GPA 3.38 [3.45]
MD average applicant numbers:
MCAT 27.3 [29.9]
S-GPA 3.36 [3.56]
NS-GPA 3.60 [3.70]
Overall GPA 3.47 [3.62]
I am perfectly confident that when I attend a DO school I will recieve the education I need to be a good doc (assuming I put in all the work that is required of me...which I will), but the numbers don't lie. the MD applicant pool is more academically qualified (at least numericallly speaking) than the DO applicant pool. Not saying there aren't those 3.7, 30+ that don't choose DO or only apply DO, but on average that's just not the case from what I can read into these stats

 

[Sainttpk]

I'm going to have to agree with jakeharley on this one. Information on this is easily obtainable at aamc.org and aacom.org
DO average applicant numbers: (matriculating student #'s in brakets)
MCAT 23.8 [24.6]
S-GPA 3.25 [3.36]
NS-GPA 3.5 [3.54]
Overall GPA 3.38 [3.45]
MD average applicant numbers:
MCAT 27.3 [29.9]
S-GPA 3.36 [3.56]
NS-GPA 3.60 [3.70]
Overall GPA 3.47 [3.62]
I am perfectly confident that when I attend a DO school I will recieve the education I need to be a good doc (assuming I put in all the work that is required of me...which I will), but the numbers don't lie. the MD applicant pool is more academically qualified (at least numericallly speaking) than the DO applicant pool. Not saying there aren't those 3.7, 30+ that don't choose DO or only apply DO, but on average that's just not the case from what I can read into these stats

I wouldn't say that MD applicants are more qualified, I think the stats are skewed, because people who go D.O. tend to be non-traditional students, or those who did not do so well their first try at college.

I think D.O. schools are great, because it gives people like me, who never thought of med school before a chance to become physicians. As an undergrad I could care less about the kind of grades I got, but now that I am a little more seasoned and mature I am more ready for medical school.

M.D. schools are great too! however it seems to me that they do not look at the whole applicant as much. Either way your gonna be a Doc, it does not matter..That is my two cents.

T

 

[Hoberto]

Either way your gonna be a Doc

Right on!

 

[91Bravo]

Because MD schools generally discriminate based on MCAT and GPA scores.

DO schools tend to take other parts of the application into consideration, to determine who would make a good physician. (There is more to a physician than grades and test scores.) Recommendations, experiences, and other factors are given more weight. MD schools won't even try to get to know you at an interview unless you meet their specific score standards. They don't take into account factors that may have occurred in your life that could have affected these numbers. This is why you will find more non-traditional students at osteopathic schools.

Gimme a break. It's faulty logic to assume that since the scores tend to be higher with allopathic schools that they must 'discriminate' against otherwise good candidates. It is true that while GPA and MCAT scores are important, allopathic schools do look at the 'whole applicant.' I am quite impressed with my fellow students in my allopathic program. We are a diverse group representing a wide range of ages, races, accomplishments, and previous experiences. I am a non-traditional student from a disadvantaged socioeconomic background, and there are several others like me. At least at my school they did a great job in selecting the members of my class.

When an allopathic school has a great 'supply' of well-qualified applicants, the school has the luxury of choosing applicants who (1) have interesting, diverse backgrounds and (2) ALSO have good MCAT and GPA scores. If you were on an admissions committee at an allopathic school would you choose any differently?

By the way, please don't interpret my post as derogatory towards osteopathic programs in any way. My second-choice school was DMU, and I would have been happy to go there had I not been accepted at my state allopathic school.

 

[drusso]

So, what's the solution? How should osteopathic medicine position itself in order to attract more talented applicants?

Norman Gevitz, PhD one of the osteopathic profession's leading historians and social critics has long promulgated ideas to transform osteopathic medicine from a minority to elite status. It essentially involves re-tooling the profession a number of ways so that it's priorities match its mission:

Today, the stigma that so long trailed DOs has largely disappeared, albeit not forgotten. DOs and MDs routinely work together in myriad professional relationships. Nevertheless, osteopathy, which was once a social movement as well as a medical profession, remains largely invisible in the public eye. Gevitz suggests a program for revitalizing osteopathy?s independent existence, but his arguments lack conviction. Making the change from a medical minority to a medical elite will require a quantum leap from its present status as a school of second choice for many prospective medical students. In the last analysis, Gevitz concludes, "the future of osteopathic medicine may ultimately rest in the DOs own hands?and how they use them" (p 191).

Full Review

Other thoughts?

 

[OSUdoc08]

Gimme a break. It's faulty logic to assume that since the scores tend to be higher with allopathic schools that they must 'discriminate' against otherwise good candidates. It is true that while GPA and MCAT scores are important, allopathic schools do look at the 'whole applicant.' I am quite impressed with my fellow students in my allopathic program. We are a diverse group representing a wide range of ages, races, accomplishments, and previous experiences. I am a non-traditional student from a disadvantaged socioeconomic background, and there are several others like me. At least at my school they did a great job in selecting the members of my class.

When an allopathic school has a great 'supply' of well-qualified applicants, the school has the luxury of choosing applicants who (1) have interesting, diverse backgrounds and (2) ALSO have good MCAT and GPA scores. If you were on an admissions committee at an allopathic school would you choose any differently?

By the way, please don't interpret my post as derogatory towards osteopathic programs in any way. My second-choice school was DMU, and I would have been happy to go there had I not been accepted at my state allopathic school.

This is exactly what they do.

 

[91Bravo]

This is exactly what they do.

Seriously....why do you harbor such an intense hatred for allopathic adcoms?

Imagine yourself on an adcom (osteopathic or allopathic) and choose between the following applicants:

(A) 30 MCAT, 3.7 GPA, non-traditional, published research, extensive health care volunteering, previous employment in the health care field.

(B) 25 MCAT, 3.2 GPA, non-traditional, published research, extensive health care volunteering, previous employment in the health care field.

If both applicants are 'well-rounded' with respect to experience, etc., why on earth would you choose someone with lower scores across the board (unless they have a good reason for it)?

 

[Pewl]

This thread is pointless. MD's are the status quo, and so they have prestige and pride. It's like getting Tylenol vs Rite Aid brand ibuprofen. Both will have the same effect, but one is name brand. I actually think that DO's get a more complete education with the ostepathic manipulation stuff. But, again, MD schools have a higher rep for taking students with better numbers.

 

[novacek88]

Prestige is subjective of course and dependent upon the person(s) doing the "perceiving". And this makes all the difference in the world. To the general public, just being a doctor is prestigious enough on it's own. But in the eyes of an M.D., you are seen as being "lesser" because you couldn't supposedly get into an allopathic school. What's funny is that this discrimination has no end. Private M.D. school grads frown upon the people who attend state schools. Even among state school M.D.'s, they know which ones are more prestigious than others. The New York, Mass. and California state school M.D.'s know they are in a league above the M.D. grads from small states with much easier entrance stats like Arkansas, Oklahoma and Mississippi.

Then you have discrimination in residency. The surgeons bash on the non-surgeons. Among the non-surgeons, the specialists (radiologists, cardiologists) bash on the primary care docs (family practice). Heck, even among surgeons, you have discrimination. Surgeons bash on opthalmologists and don't consider them real surgeons because they didn't have to undergo a 5 year general surgery residency and endure the harsh with that. Neurosurgeons think everyone is beneath them. CT, Vascular and Plastic surgeons make fun of orthopods and think they are overrated carpenters who know nothing outside their field.

And let's not forget about the IMG's. Both MD and DO's crack on the IMG's. But the IMG's at least have MD behind their title so the general public has no idea if you attended a foreign medical school and will assume you were trained in the U.S.

In my opinion, the general public's perception of me is the only one that counts. I don't care what my colleagues may think of me or my osteopathic education.

And if you are that superficial, make certain you become a surgeon. Because a U.S. M.D. that is a primary care doc is considered to be inferior to a DO or IMG that specializes in a more competitive field. The general public may not know the difference between an MD and a DO but they do know the difference between a cardiologist and an internist regardless of your initials.

 

[Hoberto]

The more important thing I've noticed is that patients are frequently more impressed with DOs than with MDs.


Of course, not always....and I don't think there's been a study, so, unfortunately, this is purely based on my observation.

 

[novacek88]

The more important thing I've noticed is that patients are frequently more impressed with DOs than with MDs.


Of course, not always....and I don't think there's been a study, so, unfortunately, this is purely based on my observation.

Yes but not because they can do OMM. I have spoken to several patients who say they want to see a DO because they are more approachable and less stuck up than M.D.'s. I don't think this stereotype is accurate at all. However, I have heard this stated on numerous occassions.

 

[novacek88]

Gimme a break. It's faulty logic to assume that since the scores tend to be higher with allopathic schools that they must 'discriminate' against otherwise good candidates. It is true that while GPA and MCAT scores are important, allopathic schools do look at the 'whole applicant.' I am quite impressed with my fellow students in my allopathic program. We are a diverse group representing a wide range of ages, races, accomplishments, and previous experiences. I am a non-traditional student from a disadvantaged socioeconomic background, and there are several others like me. At least at my school they did a great job in selecting the members of my class.

When an allopathic school has a great 'supply' of well-qualified applicants, the school has the luxury of choosing applicants who (1) have interesting, diverse backgrounds and (2) ALSO have good MCAT and GPA scores. If you were on an admissions committee at an allopathic school would you choose any differently?

By the way, please don't interpret my post as derogatory towards osteopathic programs in any way. My second-choice school was DMU, and I would have been happy to go there had I not been accepted at my state allopathic school.

Actually you are just flat out wrong. Maybe your school is different but the majority of allopathic schools are very numbers based. For one thing the average age of Osteopathic students is higher than that of allopathic students. The average MCAT score is significantly higher as well despite the difference in GPA not being as striking. That's not a coincidence. I have several family members including my spouse who are M.D.'s and all of them admit their classes contained the more "traditional" medical students who came straight from college or took a year off.

It's much more difficult achieving a high MCAT score when you have been out of college for several years and working in a different field. Osteopathic schools recognize this and are not apt to reject an otherwise qualified candidate simply because his or her MCAT didn't exceed their average. Not all of us can conveniently enroll in Kaplan after our sophmore year of undergrad and then take the test in April of our junior year with this material fresh in our minds. Those of us who worked and held full time jobs and as well as families didn't have this opportunity so naturall our scores are not going to be as high. There are some people like this who achieve a high MCAT despite all this but they are not the majority.

If you had an opportunity to attend a class at an osteopathic school, you can easily note the difference. At least 1/3 of every DO class consists of students who held a full time job for a several years prior to matriculation.

 

[Nate]

A physician is a physician is a physician. A surgeon is a surgeon is a surgeon. And a pre-med is a pre-med is a pre-med (the ones who actually buy into this). This means nothing once you start training in medicine and realize it’s the same damn thing wherever you go minus the Wednesday afternoon OMM we get in DO school and the “proud history of DOs” or the “proud history of MDs”. In medicine and science there is no hoarding of knowledge, every discovery made at Harvard or in London for that matter, will be taught to you in every medical school, because the board exams are the universal qualifier. Sure, OMM may have it uses and if nothing else it gives us a little extra body mechanics knowledge but so what? It doesn’t change who you are and how you are going to relate to people because how you relate to people is intrinsic in you and patients are just people, and yes, even doctors are people and we have to relate to them also. I don’t care what you tell me about philosophies or the kinds of people certain schools take, to me people are people and whether you have charisma and empathy is a totally personal thing. It is just so diverse that no ad-com will be able to pick you out, DO or MD, unless you are a total lunatic.
No matter what you do you are going to have people who act like they are better than you (usually because they are worried that you are better than them), you are going to have people who simply cannot relate to another human being and make people uncomfortable, and you will have people who are magnets and are full of charisma. These things have nothing to do with your degree. The only thing that is certain in medicine is that we all have to bust our asses to get through it because it is a long marathon we run; no matter what US medical school you go to. In the end, it is what YOU accomplish that will define you, not your degree.

 

[OSUdoc08]

Seriously....why do you harbor such an intense hatred for allopathic adcoms?

Imagine yourself on an adcom (osteopathic or allopathic) and choose between the following applicants:

(A) 30 MCAT, 3.7 GPA, non-traditional, published research, extensive health care volunteering, previous employment in the health care field.

(B) 25 MCAT, 3.2 GPA, non-traditional, published research, extensive health care volunteering, previous employment in the health care field.

If both applicants are 'well-rounded' with respect to experience, etc., why on earth would you choose someone with lower scores across the board (unless they have a good reason for it)?

This is not emphasized by allopathic admissions committees as much as with osteopathic admissions committees. (This is via personal experience.) Allopathic committees on the other hand, prefer the research.