Dual degree DO/MD

[hopefuldoc87]

Actually that would be pretty sweet if you could get an MD going to a DO school. The whole MD/DO debate would vanish in an instant if that were possible.

You would see all the DO schools become much more competitive, while reducing the competitiveness of the whole process. There would be the added benefit of a lot less 24-29 MCAT students matriculating and open up more spots for the 30+ MCAT students who have to reapply (which I feel is a shame when the less deserving students are consistently getting in).

Using your logic, why the hell aren't all those more deserving 30+ MCATers applying to DO to begin with instead of waiting to reapply and possibly not make it in again? I mean obviously their superior scores would mean instant acceptances over those lowly 24-29 MCATers.

Oh wait, that would mean they would have to live their lives being spat on by their MD counterparts. What a cruel world!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Forthegood]

Right.... and that's why the MCAT is the ONLY deciding factor for ADCOMs.... wait a second... no its not!

 

[shnuffles]

this is a fantastic thread. mention do on the pre-allo thread and watch the flames fly

 

[hopefuldoc87]

this is a fantastic thread. mention do on the pre-allo thread and watch the flames fly

No, I just think it's a bold statement to say all entrants to DO schools are less deserving of becoming doctors. Its one thing to mention DO..its another to say they are lesS deserving of being accepted to medical school. I interviewed at both MD and DO schools and many of the applicants at the DO schools had impressive ECs n experiences. They should not be called less deserving by hemoglobincell just because he/she maybe hasn't been as succesful in the application process and is now looking to place blame elsewhere.

High mcat =/= more deserving

 

[Forthegood]

^^agreed, and in 15 years you will look back on this test... and probably not even remember what you scored. It is not that important after you get in. Sorry to burst anyone's ego bubble, but looking back... were you more deserving of highschool if you made good grades in middleschool? How about college for SAT scores? Nope. Doesn't matter at all. Just determines where and if you go to the next level... and that is all.

 

[J1515]

True.

But

High mcat = more qualified

It's the only way to compare applicants on equal ground. Nobody here seems to understand that.

 

[Forthegood]

Yes, it is the only objective view... aside from the interview. Regardless, the problem with the MCAT is it doesn't tell the whole story. My apartment's roof got taken off by a tornado a month before my MCAT. I spent the next few weeks sleeping on my neighbors couch, then driving an hour to a hotel for the last 2 weeks. All of this while taking full time hours and working full time. So no, my MCAT score is not an objective analysis of how I perform as a student.

On the other hand, I still did well enough to get in my first choice... so no complaints from me.

 

[236116]

Actually, even with the sad story, it does.

Nobody is asking how you will perform under ideal circumstances.

They want to know how you perform in real life. Part of real life is setbacks.

If your test scores crumble the first time your house floods or you can't find a babysitter for your illegitimate child, then maybe you aren't the kind of student/resident programs want.

Tired, hon.

This isn't about real life.

You should know that by now.

 

[Forthegood]

Did you read that?

Then I guess I passed, because I got in without a problem...

I feel like we are getting away from the point. The point is, yes, an objective standard like the MCAT is a great way to compare students. On the other hand, it is not the only way. Which is why we interview.

 

[hopefuldoc87]

True.

But

High mcat = more qualified

I completely agree.

Look I'll be the first to say that I would like my doctor to have a high MCAT score and a high GPA, because, well I just want to have a smart doctor treating me.

What irked me was when that person said those with lower MCAT scores are less deserving of acceptance into the medical field. Would you take the socially inept 34 MCATer with no clinical and work experience over a 28 MCATer with lots of time spent volunteering and working in clinical settings? While a high MCAT does provide a equal playing field for all applicants, there are other factors involved. Higher MCAT does not mean they have earned their right to become a doctor.

 

[bllo]

Becoming a doctor is a long road of jumping through hoops. Ultimately, the last step is what matters most - residency. In high school, we took a variety of tests (SATs, APs, IBs, etc.) to get us into college. Then in college, we take the MCATs to get us into medical school. But the most important test will be the boards. The boards and our 1st year of clinical rotations is what determines the residency we get and thereby much of our future. I would not agree that the MCAT is a good indicator of how intelligent of a doctor you will be. In fact, most doctors do not remember any of their physics or organic chemistry. If you really had to base a doctor's intelligence off of a written test (which is faulty in itself), you would base it off of the boards score. Based off of my experience, I have seen many doctors who graduated from unheard of schools around the world. Yet if they can land a good US residency, they're set. For instance, at the cardiology lab that I work in, 8 out of the 10 doctors graduated from medical schools outside of the US. But they're doing awesome right now.

For those who want it bad enough, you can become a doctor through various means. And if you really wanted to judge a doctor at face value, you would have to look at where he did his residency and how well he scored in his boards and rotation grades.

Lastly, on the DO/MD thing. Unfortunately, there is a lot of bias against the DOs. That's just how it is in most parts of America. While scientifically, the 2 learn pretty much the same things, their approach is different, and there is OMM. Personally, I find the DOs interesting as a result, and they prove to be very useful for missions work. HOWEVER, unfortunately the stigma still stands. If you are a doctor walking down the hallway of a Californian hospital with a badge that says "<name>, DO", a common person will not know what you are. At my own hospital, nurses look down upon the DO, dubbing them "not doctors," despite their abilities. To choose DO, you have to truly love OMM and the DO approach, as well as be able to overcome the prejudices you will have to face.

If I offend anyone, I'm sorry, but I'm just trying to put in my two cents based off of a lot of experience and a lot of good advisors.

 

[Forthegood]

Agreed. You can shadow and care all you want, but its not going to make you a good physician.

I think there are other ways to show you have a mind aside from the MCAT. Research can be one of those ways.

Maybe I would take the 28 MCAT who cared alot vs a 34 MCAT who didnt, so long as that 28 MCAT got a 230 on their Step 1. Again, I know everyone on here hates this, but the MCAT is just not important after getting in...

 

[J1515]

Yes, it is the only objective view... aside from the interview. Regardless, the problem with the MCAT is it doesn't tell the whole story. My apartment's roof got taken off by a tornado a month before my MCAT. I spent the next few weeks sleeping on my neighbors couch, then driving an hour to a hotel for the last 2 weeks. All of this while taking full time hours and working full time.

So you either:

1) Reschedule the test (yes, you can lose 1 year of your life)
2) Take the test and bomb it - take it again in a few months and do fine
3) Take the test and hope for the best.

I don't see what the problem is. You people make it seem like everything a pre-med does is a life or death situation. In the end, it seems you handled the situation just fine so this isn't even an issue with you.

While scientifically, the 2 learn pretty much the same things, their approach is different

No it isn't.

To choose DO, you have to truly love OMM and the DO approach,

There is no DO approach. And something like 5% of practicing DOs use OMM.

Personally, I find the DOs interesting as a result, and they prove to be very useful for missions work

What? lol

If I offend anyone, I'm sorry, but I'm just trying to put in my two cents based off of a lot of experience and a lot of good advisors.

Might I suggest your advisors aren't as good as you think they are, and your experience doesn't make you as knowledgable as you think. No offense intended.

as well as be able to overcome the prejudices you will have to face.

I'm not ripping on you because you don't know any better, but how about we leave the "this is how it is" stories to people who have rotated through the hospitals, worked the 24 hours shifts, etc.. Otherwise we end up with a bunch of pre-meds who think they know everything because they volunteered/worked in the healthcare field, or their mom/dad/uncle told them ____________. Just to play devil's advocate to all your great advisors and experience: I'm just a 4th year, but there has been zero prejudice against DOs at my hospitals and I've never seen a patient ask my residents, attendings, or me what a DO is. That's anecdotal evidence, just like your's. It may not be universal.

 

[J1515]

Again, I know everyone on here hates this, but the MCAT is just not important after getting in...

You're right, it's not. Once you get in, everyone starts talking about step 1, and again you have people who can't break a 200 complaining about how a stupid test doesn't determine how good of a doctor they will be and other things should be taken into account (and are).

 

[Decicco]

The MCAT is a good predictor of Step 1 scores. Of course, you can't rest on your laurels after a good MCAT score. But, a M1 class with a low average MCAT will likely have a low average Step 1 as well.

 

[howelljolly]

Just to play devil's advocate to all your great advisors and experience: I'm just a 4th year, but there has been zero prejudice against DOs at my hospitals and I've never seen a patient ask my residents, attendings, or me what a DO is. That's anecdotal evidence, just like your's. It may not be universal.

Agreed. Im an MD student, and have rotated in a hospital that has a AOA/DO residency program. Noone cares, noone looks down on them, most people dont even notice.

 

[bllo]

.

 

[bllo]

So you either:

1) Reschedule the test (yes, you can lose 1 year of your life)
2) Take the test and bomb it - take it again in a few months and do fine
3) Take the test and hope for the best.

I don't see what the problem is. You people make it seem like everything a pre-med does is a life or death situation. In the end, it seems you handled the situation just fine so this isn't even an issue with you.



No it isn't.



There is no DO approach. And something like 5% of practicing DOs use OMM.


What? lol



Might I suggest your advisors aren't as good as you think they are, and your experience doesn't make you as knowledgable as you think. No offense intended.





I'm not ripping on you because you don't know any better, but how about we leave the "this is how it is" stories to people who have rotated through the hospitals, worked the 24 hours shifts, etc.. Otherwise we end up with a bunch of pre-meds who think they know everything because they volunteered/worked in the healthcare field, or their mom/dad/uncle told them ____________. Just to play devil's advocate to all your great advisors and experience: I'm just a 4th year, but there has been zero prejudice against DOs at my hospitals and I've never seen a patient ask my residents, attendings, or me what a DO is. That's anecdotal evidence, just like your's. It may not be universal.

No it isn't.

In what way? I mean, I'm learning here, too, so if you can provide me good evidence, I'll listen. But otherwise, I disagree. DOs are known to have a more holistic approach. They intend to look at patients as a whole.

There is no DO approach. And something like 5% of practicing DOs use OMM.

Yes, that is true. But you still have to put up with several years of learning about OMM as well as be tested on it.

What? lol

Why is my opinion funny? I think that's kind of rude.


Might I suggest your advisors aren't as good as you think they are, and your experience doesn't make you as knowledgable as you think. No offense intended.

Of course. I'm still learning, and I gather everything I've seen and experienced.


I'm not ripping on you because you don't know any better, but how about we leave the "this is how it is" stories to people who have rotated through the hospitals, worked the 24 hours shifts, etc.. Otherwise we end up with a bunch of pre-meds who think they know everything because they volunteered/worked in the healthcare field, or their mom/dad/uncle told them ____________. Just to play devil's advocate to all your great advisors and experience: I'm just a 4th year, but there has been zero prejudice against DOs at my hospitals and I've never seen a patient ask my residents, attendings, or me what a DO is. That's anecdotal evidence, just like your's. It may not be universal.[/quote]

I never said it was universal. There was a reason why I said "California hospital." As I stated, it is a matter of where you go. And I'm not looking down on DOs or anything, but I'm trying to let people know that there is a stigma. Likewise, there's a stigma that Mexicans are uneducated in southern California. And there's a stigma that the South are racist against Blacks. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just trying to let people know that it is something they will have to face, depending on where they go. And believe me, I don't put myself on a pedastal from my experiences. I'm going with what I've learned. Ultimately, I want to practice in SoCal, where a lot of the prejudices exist. At Northwestern Med School, students laugh at the DOs. Thus, at the Northwestern Clinic, DOs are completely looked down upon. Whereas if you go to Arizona, most of the doctors there are DOs, and it's the way of life there.


With all that said, I can't agree with your comments, but I'm open to news, since again, I'm learning through all this too.

 

[bllo]

Moreover, people can choose what they want to believe. But I try to have the most unbiased perspective possible, even if it means hearing things I don't want to hear. I can say with certainty that as a southern Californian resident, if given the option between going for the DO or the MD degree, I would choose the MD. And if I really wanted to learn OMM, I'll just hope to pick it up later. OMM is not to be laughed at, even if it's so rarely used in the US. It's great for medical missions trips where you see patients only once. At least you're able to provide them some temporary comfort. If I went elsewhere in the US to practice one day, I'm sure the MD or DO degree won't matter much. But if I plan on staying here, MD is far less prejudiced against. Additionally, if I plan on working abroad, the MD is more likely to be the accepted degree.

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

No it isn't.

In what way? I mean, I'm learning here, too, so if you can provide me good evidence, I'll listen. But otherwise, I disagree. DOs are known to have a more holistic approach. They intend to look at patients as a whole.

So, you are telling me that MDs don't look at their patients as a whole? They only treat the disease? I guess that AOA propaganda pamphlet was spot on. Congrats AOA, maybe you got one right, good thing I went to a DO program b/c of that pamphlet.

Also, as a pre-med from Cali, how the hell would you know what goes on at Northwestern med school or within their clinic and the supposed "prejudice" that goes on against their fellow DO colleagues from CCOM? Heresay? Yeah, thought so.

 

[Bacchus]

Where's the nearest cliff?

 

[bllo]

I gave that specific example because I did an internship at Northwestern's clinic for a summer. I could say that I also have friends at Northwestern Med. School who tell me the same thing but my own experiences would probably be better to go off of. Listen, like I said, if you don't want to hear it, then don't.

 

[J1515]

In what way? I mean, I'm learning here, too, so if you can provide me good evidence, I'll listen. But otherwise, I disagree. DOs are known to have a more holistic approach. They intend to look at patients as a whole.

So allopathic students don't look at the patients as a whole and just treat the symptoms? I think there are quite a few MDs who would take offense to your thoughts. What you think you know about DOs in this day and age is not accurate I'm sorry to say. I've been through 4 years of DO school and rotated through the hospitals with MD students. There is no DO approach. This is why you should leave the advice-giving to people who have actually experienced this stuff and gone through it rather than basing advice off of what you have read or heard.

Yes, that is true. But you still have to put up with several years of learning about OMM as well as be tested on it.

Yes, most people 'put up with it' as you say. That does not mean that we love OMM or the so-called DO approach as you previously put it.

Why is my opinion funny? I think that's kind of rude.
OMM is not to be laughed at, even if it's so rarely used in the US. It's great for medical missions trips where you see patients only once.

Wasn't trying to be offensive. Your comment was just so out of left field. There's no justification as to why a DO degree would be useful specifically for medical mission work. The degrees are essentially the same and with all due respect, you really know nothing about OMM until you have actually learned it or practiced it.

I never said it was universal. There was a reason why I said "California hospital." As I stated, it is a matter of where you go. And I'm not looking down on DOs or anything, but I'm trying to let people know that there is a stigma. Likewise, there's a stigma that Mexicans are uneducated in southern California. And there's a stigma that the South are racist against Blacks. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just trying to let people know that it is something they will have to face, depending on where they go.

Geez, so as a jew I'm going to have my hands full trying to practice medicine in Alabama, or as an African American I'm going to have to face a stigma practicing anywhere in the south, and as a DO I'm going to have difficultly practicing in any California hospital I'm not trying to be mean, but you are probably better off letting senior medical students, residents, and physicians tell people about this stuff. They have experienced it first hand.

Just a little word of advice about this topic of stigmas, if you decide to enter OB/GYN as an MD, every single surgeon (MD and DO) you run into is going to make fun of you and tell you you aren't qualified to be a doctor. If you go into orthopedics (MD), you are going to have every internal medicine doctor (MD and DO) tell you you have no idea how to practice medicine. Don't even bother with psychiatry. The list goes on.

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

Looks like bllo just got owned.

 

[236116]

kids.... don't make a mod pull this thread over.

 

[bllo]

So you either:

1) Reschedule the test (yes, you can lose 1 year of your life)
2) Take the test and bomb it - take it again in a few months and do fine
3) Take the test and hope for the best.

I don't see what the problem is. You people make it seem like everything a pre-med does is a life or death situation. In the end, it seems you handled the situation just fine so this isn't even an issue with you.



No it isn't.



There is no DO approach. And something like 5% of practicing DOs use OMM.


What? lol



Might I suggest your advisors aren't as good as you think they are, and your experience doesn't make you as knowledgable as you think. No offense intended.





I'm not ripping on you because you don't know any better, but how about we leave the "this is how it is" stories to people who have rotated through the hospitals, worked the 24 hours shifts, etc.. Otherwise we end up with a bunch of pre-meds who think they know everything because they volunteered/worked in the healthcare field, or their mom/dad/uncle told them ____________. Just to play devil's advocate to all your great advisors and experience: I'm just a 4th year, but there has been zero prejudice against DOs at my hospitals and I've never seen a patient ask my residents, attendings, or me what a DO is. That's anecdotal evidence, just like your's. It may not be universal.

So allopathic students don't look at the patients as a whole and just treat the symptoms? I think there are quite a few MDs who would take offense to your thoughts. What you think you know about DOs in this day and age is not accurate I'm sorry to say. I've been through 4 years of DO school and rotated through the hospitals with MD students. There is no DO approach. This is why you should leave the advice-giving to people who have actually experienced this stuff and gone through it rather than basing advice off of what you have read or heard.




Yes, most people 'put up with it' as you say. That does not mean that we love OMM or the so-called DO approach as you previously put it.



Wasn't trying to be offensive. Your comment was just so out of left field. There's no justification as to why a DO degree would be useful specifically for medical mission work. The degrees are essentially the same and with all due respect, you really know nothing about OMM until you have actually learned it or practiced it.



Geez, so as a jew I'm going to have my hands full trying to practice medicine in Alabama, or as an African American I'm going to have to face a stigma practicing anywhere in the south, and as a DO I'm going to have difficultly practicing in any California hospital I'm not trying to be mean, but you are probably better off letting senior medical students, residents, and physicians tell people about this stuff. They have experienced it first hand.

Just a little word of advice about this topic of stigmas, if you decide to enter OB/GYN as an MD, every single surgeon (MD and DO) you run into is going to make fun of you and tell you you aren't qualified to be a doctor. If you go into orthopedics (MD), you are going to have every internal medicine doctor (MD and DO) tell you you have no idea how to practice medicine. Don't even bother with psychiatry. The list goes on.

There is no DO approach? Out of curiosity, which DO school do you go to? I will trust what you say for your school then. But Western Pacific did not tell me that. The DO teaching there told me himself how proud he was of the DO approach. If that's not true for all DO schools, then I can accept that.

I only meant then that if DO and MD are considered to be the same, for those who like or don't like OMM, that could be a deciding factor on which to choose.

I definitely was not saying that DO is specifically useful for just medical mission work. I just meant that for many underserved patients, there really isn't much you can do for them. As a result, helping them alleviate some spinal musculo-skeletal pain is good.

Yes, I agree with you. People who are in it are far better to listen to than me because you all have so much more experience. But either way, I'm still going to say some of the things that I have seen.

 

[bllo]

A five minute search reveals...

http://www.feinberg.northwestern.edu/depts/pmr/residency/residents.html

http://www.feinberg.northwestern.edu/anesthesiology/hospitals-and-faculty/nmh/tamul.html

http://www.feinberg.northwestern.edu/depts/family_med/faculty_profiles/Tanney_Robert.html

Tool.

So you're saying DOs can make it up there too. What's your point? I never said DOs aren't as good as MDs, nor did I ever say they couldn't be up there. If anything, those people up there probably face *some* bad stereotypes by ignorant people. In the cardiology lab that I work in, there is a very well respected DO, and he's 1 of my favorite doctors because he likes to help premed students. Even he is looked down upon by some of the nurses. He told me that less educated people sometimes just act that way.

Everyone is so defensive. I never said DOs are worse than MDs or vice versa.

 

[J1515]

There is no DO approach? Out of curiosity, which DO school do you go to? I will trust what you say for your school then. But Western Pacific did not tell me that. The DO teaching there told me himself how proud he was of the DO approach. If that's not true for all DO schools, then I can accept that.

Of course the OMM department is going to tell you that. The supposed DO approach is the only thing that allows them to keep their job. If you are gullible, you will believe it. I've also heard stories about some OMM professors talking about placing their hands above a patient's body and being able to feel the energy. If you actually talk to DO students, residents, and doctors in practice, they will tell you the truth.

I only meant then that if DO and MD are considered to be the same, for those who like or don't like OMM, that could be a deciding factor on which to choose.

Absolutely agree.

I definitely was not saying that DO is specifically useful for just medical mission work. I just meant that for many underserved patients, there really isn't much you can do for them. As a result, helping them alleviate some spinal musculo-skeletal pain is good.

Musculo-skeletal pain is the least of these patients' problems, but I've never done medical mission work so I will leave that to the people who have.

Yes, I agree with you. People who are in it are far better to listen to than me because you all have so much more experience. But either way, I'm still going to say some of the things that I have seen.

And I will continue to speak of the time I saw a chief surgery resident rip on the ob/gyn department at my hospital and say they shouldn't be allowed to practice medicine. Therefore, nobody should go into ob/gyn.

 

[bllo]

Maybe it's my fault for not being careful with my words that everyone keeps strangling what I say. I never went as far as to say "I saw -- therefore nobody should go there." I'm merely saying "I saw --."

I'm confused as to what path I'm going to take myself. At the moment, I'm facing the challenge of picking DO or MD. I have no idea which school I'm going to go to yet. All that I care about is that, I'm in. So I'm not saying "I saw ---, therefore I will never want to be a DO."

sigh. I'm tired of this.

 

[J1515]

Maybe it's my fault for not being careful with my words that everyone keeps strangling what I say. I never went as far as to say "I saw -- therefore nobody should go there." I'm merely saying "I saw --."

I'm confused as to what path I'm going to take myself. At the moment, I'm facing the challenge of picking DO or MD. I have no idea which school I'm going to go to yet. All that I care about is that, I'm in. So I'm not saying "I saw ---, therefore I will never want to be a DO."

sigh. I'm tired of this.

To put it nicely, I think the point everyone here is trying to make is don't take a single experience or hearsay and pass it off as universal fact. Multiple people here have proven that what you were mistakenly trying to pass off as fact was actually the personal opinion of a select few that you've come in contact with. Do your research.

 

[bllo]

To put it nicely, I think the point everyone here is trying to make is don't take a single experience or hearsay and pass it off as universal fact. Multiple people here have proven that what you were mistakenly trying to pass off as fact was actually the personal opinion of a select few that you've come in contact with. Do your research.

Noted. (not sarcasm)

And actually, what it really means for me is that I'm not going to bother putting down what I've seen because people get easily offended, and I know it is my fault too for not being able to clearly communicate via text. Instead, it's easier being passive and hearing everyone else talk. There was a lot of misunderstanding, and it's really not worth my time. I'm just thankful for all the people who have helped me get to where I'm at, and I wanted to do the same for others.

 

[DeadCactus]

Students sure love to go on and on about what it takes to be a physician...

 

[hopefuldoc87]

Would the adcom's? I don't know. I suspect a lot would.

Would I personally? Hell yes I'd take the 34 MCAT.

I don't see what "volunteering" has to do with becoming a physician. We're training doctors, not nuns. And "clinical experience" means nothing to me. I was a CNA for years before I went to med school, and everything I saw doing that put me about 3 weeks ahead of my classmates who had none.

I want doctors who are smart. I don't care about their love of the community, and I don't care what job they did before medical school. Volunteering, shadowing, and hospital jobs are things that any idiot can do. It shows nothing in my mind. A 34 MCAT, on the other hand . . .

I got a 29 MCAT and none of my interviewers questioned my score, and some in fact said I did just fine. Isn't the average for all matriculants 30 anyways? Regardless, I'm happy the adcomm's didn't choose the 34 MCAT over me, so

I wish you were on the adcomms for the schools I interviewed at. I wouldn't have had to work throughout college, volunteer and gain any clinical experience whatsoever. Quick question though, if an applicant has no clinical experience, how do you expect them to have any idea of what they're getting themselves into? Granted no pre-med student has any idea of what they're getting themselves into, but I've known a few people who volunteered/shadowed only to realize that medicine is not for them.

And yes, any idiot can shadow, volunteer, or work at a hospital job. Maybe its just a commitment thing which is why they are recommended for applicants. It may mean nothing in your mind, but I'm sure a handful of applicants with high MCATS are rejected for not having done these things.

 

[hopefuldoc87]

Becoming a doctor is a long road of jumping through hoops. Ultimately, the last step is what matters most - residency. In high school, we took a variety of tests (SATs, APs, IBs, etc.) to get us into college. Then in college, we take the MCATs to get us into medical school. But the most important test will be the boards. The boards and our 1st year of clinical rotations is what determines the residency we get and thereby much of our future. I would not agree that the MCAT is a good indicator of how intelligent of a doctor you will be. In fact, most doctors do not remember any of their physics or organic chemistry. If you really had to base a doctor's intelligence off of a written test (which is faulty in itself), you would base it off of the boards score. Based off of my experience, I have seen many doctors who graduated from unheard of schools around the world. Yet if they can land a good US residency, they're set. For instance, at the cardiology lab that I work in, 8 out of the 10 doctors graduated from medical schools outside of the US. But they're doing awesome right now.

For those who want it bad enough, you can become a doctor through various means. And if you really wanted to judge a doctor at face value, you would have to look at where he did his residency and how well he scored in his boards and rotation grades.

Lastly, on the DO/MD thing. Unfortunately, there is a lot of bias against the DOs. That's just how it is in most parts of America. While scientifically, the 2 learn pretty much the same things, their approach is different, and there is OMM. Personally, I find the DOs interesting as a result, and they prove to be very useful for missions work. HOWEVER, unfortunately the stigma still stands. If you are a doctor walking down the hallway of a Californian hospital with a badge that says "<name>, DO", a common person will not know what you are. At my own hospital, nurses look down upon the DO, dubbing them "not doctors," despite their abilities. To choose DO, you have to truly love OMM and the DO approach, as well as be able to overcome the prejudices you will have to face.

If I offend anyone, I'm sorry, but I'm just trying to put in my two cents based off of a lot of experience and a lot of good advisors.

Have you been to most parts of America? Or just your clinic.

BTW, that's hilarious that nurses call the DO's "not doctors". I would really like to see that in person (I'm being serious).

The stigma probably does exist, but I don't think it's as rampant as you make it out to be. Like someone else said, there's also stigma's with OB/GYN and psychiatry. Is it enough for people not to go into these fields? I doubt it.

 

[Decicco]

Have you been to most parts of America? Or just your clinic.

BTW, that's hilarious that nurses call the DO's "not doctors". I would really like to see that in person (I'm being serious).

The stigma probably does exist, but I don't think it's as rampant as you make it out to be. Like someone else said, there's also stigma's with OB/GYN and psychiatry. Is it enough for people not to go into these fields? I doubt it.

In my experience (in several midwestern states), DO schools are understood to be easier to get into by most everyone involved in healthcare. But, this doesn't mean there is a stigma per say. Also, in Des Moines where as many as 25% (my guess) of the physicians are DOs, this effect is actually higher. People in Des Moines healthcare view DMU as the school people go to when they don't get into the University of Iowa. This makes me wonder whether the "DO friendly" cities are really the ones with lots of DOs. It seems like it would be easier to go under the radar in a place that doesn't have any.

 

[Bacchus]

I feel it doesn't matter what the average population thinks. There is not going to be lack of a patient population for any physician unless that physician has a bad with rapport with many, many different individuals. As far as professionals and ill feelings, who cares? You're getting paid and living your life. Your goals should be satisfied almost entirely by you, not what others think of you.

 

[J1515]

In my experience (in several midwestern states), DO schools are understood to be easier to get into by most everyone involved in healthcare. But, this doesn't mean there is a stigma per say. Also, in Des Moines where as many as 25% (my guess) of the physicians are DOs, this effect is actually higher. People in Des Moines healthcare view DMU as the school people go to when they don't get into the University of Iowa. This makes me wonder whether the "DO friendly" cities are really the ones with lots of DOs. It seems like it would be easier to go under the radar in a place that doesn't have any.

You think about this stuff a whole lot more than any doctors, nurses, and patients do.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Wheww good ... this thread finally got to it's final destination. For a while I was worried it wouldn't come down to an 18 year old pre-med declaring that his 35 hours in a hospital confirmed that DOs aren't real doctors ... I'm just waiting for the guy with the radiologist uncle to come in and confirm so we can call this thing.

Bilo err whatever ... just stop. You aren't going to win this thing.

 

[scarletgirl777]

I feel it doesn't matter what the average population thinks. There is not going to be lack of a patient population for any physician unless that physician has a bad with rapport with many, many different individuals. As far as professionals and ill feelings, who cares? You're getting paid and living your life. Your goals should be satisfied almost entirely by you, not what others think of you.

How can you "not care" what people think? You need your fellow professionals to respect you and give you referrals. If you're not a primary care doctor, you absolutely need other doctors to send you patients. If you're interested in working in academic medicine or any kind of organization, you need your colleague's respect to be promoted in the ranks. Also, with the current economic situation, it appears that most of us will not be running one-man practices but will be working in large doctors' groups or for HMOs or in hospitals.

Not saying that DO = less respect, just saying I don't understand your counterargument.

 

[howelljolly]

How can you "not care" what people think? You need your fellow professionals to respect you and give you referrals. If you're not a primary care doctor, you absolutely need other doctors to send you patients. If you're interested in working in academic medicine or any kind of organization, you need your colleague's respect to be promoted in the ranks. Also, with the current economic situation, it appears that most of us will not be running one-man practices but will be working in large doctors' groups or for HMOs or in hospitals.

Not saying that DO = less respect, just saying I don't understand your counterargument.

"Respect" at that level will have nothing to do with whether you are an MD or DO.

It might have something to do with board certifications, or what sort of a specialty practice youve set up for yourself, and it will have a lot to do with how well you work with your colleagues.

 

[236116]

"Respect" at that level will have nothing to do with whether you are an MD or DO.

It might have something to do with board certifications, or what sort of a specialty practice youve set up for yourself, and it will have a lot to do with how well you work with your colleagues.

Except for that it can, and does.

The world's not that shiny, kids.

 

[Forthegood]

Define respect. Respect for professionals is almost exclusively respect between professionals. As in, yes, board certified and well communicated matter more than the letters after your name.

 

[Dissected]

Except for that it can, and does.

The world's not that shiny, kids.

All that will matter to me is whether jurrassicpark respects me as a doctor.



btw, in before this gets the axe

 

[236116]

All that will matter to me is whether jurrassicpark respects me as a doctor.



btw, in before this gets the axe

I respect you in every arena except sexual prowress. That you need to work on.

 

[Dissected]

I respect you in every arena except sexual prowress. That you need to work on.

understood. Ive got a date in about 30 minutes, we'll see what happens .

 

[howelljolly]

I respect you in every arena except sexual prowress. That you need to work on.

good night everyone.

 

[236116]

understood. Ive got a date in about 30 minutes, we'll see what happens .

Good luck, soldier.

 

[Revilla]

And "clinical experience" means nothing to me. I was a CNA for years before I went to med school, and everything I saw doing that put me about 3 weeks ahead of my classmates who had none.

I don't think the point of clinical experience is to give anyone a leg up in med school. I think it's more about introducing med school applicants to patient care so that you don't end up with a 3.9 GPA, 37 MCAT, 245 Step I superstar who gets to third-year rotations and discovers he hates sick people.

 

[Revilla]

Except for that it can, and does.

The world's not that shiny, kids.

I don't know. I live in an area where we've got four hospitals pretty close. One of them is a DO residency hospital and the other three have a fair mix of MDs and DOs. In my experience, no one even bothers with the initials. I've seen MDs asking DOs for consults as many times as I've seen DOs ask MDs for consults. It's anecdotal, yes, but I'm just going by my own experience, as everyone else is.

 

[Tired]

I got a 29 MCAT and none of my interviewers questioned my score, and some in fact said I did just fine. Isn't the average for all matriculants 30 anyways? Regardless, I'm happy the adcomm's didn't choose the 34 MCAT over me, so

I hope you don't think I was trying to put you down, I really wasn't. We're just having trading opinions on what we feel are most important in applicants. You got in, you're part of the club, this isn't personal in any way.

Quick question though, if an applicant has no clinical experience, how do you expect them to have any idea of what they're getting themselves into? Granted no pre-med student has any idea of what they're getting themselves into, but I've known a few people who volunteered/shadowed only to realize that medicine is not for them.

That's a fair question and a reasonable concern, and I would answer like this:

Anyone applying to a field should have some idea of what they are getting into. There are a lot of ways to do this: shadowing, talking to people in the field, working in related fields, reading books, etc. "Clinical Experience" is a good way to learn about the medical field, but I don't think that it is the only way. For me, someone who spent a year as a volunteer EMT doesn't have much better of an idea than someone who spends time reading SDN.

I also think that applicants and adcoms have mythologized the medical field in this respect. The whole notion that you "don't know what you're getting into" unless you devote hundreds of hours unpaid shadowing is patently ridiculous to me. Medicine is no more special than any other job, but you don't expect all law students to have worked as volunteer paralegals, and convenience store employees aren't required to have had a summer lemonade stand before they are interviewed.

And yes, any idiot can shadow, volunteer, or work at a hospital job. Maybe its just a commitment thing which is why they are recommended for applicants. It may mean nothing in your mind, but I'm sure a handful of applicants with high MCATS are rejected for not having done these things.

Yes, it does show commitment, and yes, I'm sure high-scoring applicants are sometimes rejected for not having done it. But my beef is that it's a relatively meaningless commitment, and people shouldn't be rejected just because they haven't done it.

When you get right down to it, the only real benefit to a student of having shadowed is this amorphous "understanding what you're getting into" concept, which I argue is a specious interpretation to begin with. It is often difficult for students to get the opportunity to do it. It requires a ton of time before you are considered to have done "enough". And it provides little to no actual learning for students who lack the foundational knowledge to truly appreciate the clinical scenarios they are observing.

So why exactly is this obligatory for applicants? It's just all part of this myth that medicine is some kind of special, transcendent experience, when in fact it's just one more career.