FMGs calling themselves MDs

[Northerner]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Let's imagine the reverse: you're telling me that if you moved to Australia you'd hang a shingle outside your office that said MD even though everyone there who saw it would interpret it as a PhD? Would you stand outside your office and explain that it was not really a PhD, but that you are an American and in your country this means that you are a physician? I have a feeling that you would have trouble paying for your overhead unless you change your initials to MBBS.

Well, you're obviously oversimplifying. There is no "shingle" anymore, nor would it influence who becomes your patient. Working in a hospital with the rights and responsibilities of a physician, the letters after my name would be a far distant concern to most, if known at all. Those who noticed it or were curious could certainly ask, and I would clarify proudly that I received my medical degree in the U.S., and I was indeed a physician. What's so awful about that?

 

[Northerner]

👍 thats right...you stay ignorant, in your little coccoon. 🙄
Unfortunatly for you, FMGs will continue to thrive in the U.S. Healthcare system, and there is very little you can do about it. Perhaps you have not read the latest data by the NRMP. Table 1 is particularly interesting. For example, 68 independent applicants matched into dermatology this year, where 158 U.S. seniors did not, or the fact that 352 independent applicants matched into Gen. surg. while 93 U.S. seniors did not. Sorry bud. That is the system.Now if only wishful thinking, and xenophobia were enough....
http://www.nrmp.org/data/chartingoutcomes2007.pdf

Don't get too proud of yourself (for the reasons Kimbercox mentioned and): the pool of U.S. graduates (MD & DO) is increasing steadily and residency positions are not. Unfortunately, FMGs are the applicant pool easiest to displace and probably the least missed - for the reasons stated earlier in the thread (likelihood of returning to native country, responsibility of tax dollars to pay for U.S. graduates' training, and so on).

 

[GreenShirt]

Well, you're obviously oversimplifying. There is no "shingle" anymore, nor would it influence who becomes your patient. Working in a hospital with the rights and responsibilities of a physician, the letters after my name would be a far distant concern to most, if known at all. Those who noticed it or were curious could certainly ask, and I would clarify proudly that I received my medical degree in the U.S., and I was indeed a physician. What's so awful about that?

That's only if you're part of the 10-20% of the physician workforce that are hospitalists. If you're part of the 80-90% that are in private practice, patients will locate you through their insurance company. If they see you listed as a PhD amongst a sea of "Dr. Board Certified MD", which one are they more likely to call up for an appointment?

 

[Northerner]

That's only if you're part of the 10-20% of the physician workforce that are hospitalists. If you're part of the 80-90% that are in private practice, patients will locate you through their insurance company. If they see you listed as a PhD amongst a sea of "Dr. Board Certified MD", which one are they more likely to call up for an appointment?

Well, obviously that's all speculation on your part, but no one should get to claim a degree they didn't earn because it makes better business sense. A huge amount of people don't know what a DO is in this country. According to you, we should we let them use MD because it might hurt their business for patients to know they didn't attend a U.S. allopathic institution. Similarly, if patients in Australia:
-are ignorant of the U.S. medical degree
-skeptical in perusing your hypothetical insurance booklets even in light of other clear indications of status as a physician
-prefer an Australian-trained physician

...who can blame them?

1) it's not their job to learn every medical degree in the world and judge who's to practice medicine and who isn't. that's for licensing boards, which have granted me (hypothetically) the right to practice in the country and the insurance company who chooses to cover my services as a physician and advertise me as such.
2) they have every option to choose someone else, and may do that. People choose providers based on any number of arbitrary or legitimate reasons: gender, ethnicity, location, how quickly they found your name, who referred, WHAT THEIR DEGREE IS (MD/DO/DPM/NP/PA) how their name sounds, but if my name's in the book as a physician in _____ specialty (or whatever you happen to be), you're being accurately represented and that's all you can ask for.
3) people are usually only most comfortable with what they know. They probably know at least a little about the medical education in Australia, and may prefer an Australian-trained doctor. They don't necessarily know what the education system is like elsewhere and may not want to go on faith. That's fine and it's understandable. In fact, in your hypothetical example, if Australia were to change their physician degree to "MD" it would certainly be advantageous if they planned to supply physicians to the U.S. But once you assign yourself a new degree that you were not granted in order to hide the fact that you have a foreign degree, that's misleading people. If you don't want to tell people where you went to school, fine (although licensing boards will ask). But to go so far as to change the degree to go unnoticed....that's borderline criminal.

I'm not saying I'm 100% against allowing some foreign physicians to use "MD", but I'm against doing it for economic reasons, especially when there are so many other healthcare provider degrees out there that might jump at the opportunity to use "MD". Where's the line?

Let me also clarify that I have no ill impression of foreign physicians as a group - I am confident they are the competent and strong providers of roughly the same medicine we practice, maybe better in some cases. The ones practicing in the U.S. are no doubt on the same level as U.S.-trained physicians (as evidenced by their acquiring practice rights in the U.S.). This discussion does not address this - it addresses the use of different but perhaps equivalent medical degrees. Frankly, it's sort of a stupid topic, but I'm bored and ornery. So there you go, partner.

 

[bulletproof]

Don't get too proud of yourself (for the reasons Kimbercox mentioned and): the pool of U.S. graduates (MD & DO) is increasing steadily and residency positions are not. Unfortunately, FMGs are the applicant pool easiest to displace and probably the least missed - for the reasons stated earlier in the thread (likelihood of returning to native country, responsibility of tax dollars to pay for U.S. graduates' training, and so on).

In retrospect, I should have clarified the term "independent candidate". While the FMGs may be easy to replace, as you say, I don't see any major new commitments to medical schools in the U.S. on a scale that would offset the current U.S. physician shortage, or satisfy a system that has a couple of thousand more residency positions than it does medical degree holders.

 

[bulletproof]

Let me also clarify that I have no ill impression of foreign physicians as a group - I am confident they are the competent and strong providers of roughly the same medicine we practice, maybe better in some cases. The ones practicing in the U.S. are no doubt on the same level as U.S.-trained physicians (as evidenced by their acquiring practice rights in the U.S.). This discussion does not address this - it addresses the use of different but perhaps equivalent medical degrees. Frankly, it's sort of a stupid topic, but I'm bored and ornery. So there you go, partner.

👍

 

[cel083]

Anybody who believe it is stupid for an MBBS, MBChB, etc., holder to be styled an "MD" should read Article 131 Section 6529 of the New York State Education Law. This regulatory agency, the so-called "University of the State of New York," (not the "State University of New York", which is a different institution) claims the right to award an M.D. to a fifth pathway graduate upon paying $300. That's right, $300 will earn you an M.D., after they already have a credential that authorizes you to practice medicine. Why can't the stupid state legislators just grant these doctors the automatic right in the first place to style themselves "M.D." and get the affair over with, w/o charging $300? Or does the state really need the money so badly? Oh, well, 106 postings wasted on this topic, and mine is the 107th. (BTW, my father is a foreign-trained physician here in TX, albeit an M.D. [Philippine graduate, been practicing in the U.S. for over 30 years from start of residency to today], so there is no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of competent foreign physicians in the U.S., so this post is NOT at all an insult to foreign-trained doctors)

New York State Education Department/University of the State of New York Office of the Professions

http://www.op.nysed.gov/article131.htm

 

[dannieloco]

I agree with you. FMG's are adequately trained to be physicians or "MD's" but acquired their degrees outside of America. My Mom was a physician in Peru and when we came to the US, she passed her USMLE, did her residency and then started her own clinic. It's been over 20 years now. She has plenty of patients and new patients coming in daily- a testament to her ability to offer medical services in America, much like AMG's.

Anybody who believe it is stupid for an MBBS, MBChB, etc., holder to be styled an "MD" should read Article 131 Section 6529 of the New York State Education Law. This regulatory agency, the so-called "University of the State of New York," (not the "State University of New York", which is a different institution) claims the right to award an M.D. to a fifth pathway graduate upon paying $300. That's right, $300 will earn you an M.D., after they already have a 👍 credential that authorizes you to practice medicine. Why can't the stupid state legislators just grant these doctors the automatic right in the first place to style themselves "M.D." and get the affair over with, w/o charging $300? Or does the state really need the money so badly? Oh, well, 106 postings wasted on this topic, and mine is the 107th. (BTW, my father is a foreign-trained physician here in TX, albeit an M.D. [Philippine graduate, been practicing in the U.S. for over 30 years from start of residency to today], so there is no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of competent foreign physicians in the U.S., so this post is NOT at all an insult to foreign-trained doctors)

New York State Education Department/University of the State of New York Office of the Professions

http://www.op.nysed.gov/article131.htm

 

[TRAMD]

Anybody who believe it is stupid for an MBBS, MBChB, etc., holder to be styled an "MD" should read Article 131 Section 6529 of the New York State Education Law. This regulatory agency, the so-called "University of the State of New York," (not the "State University of New York", which is a different institution) claims the right to award an M.D. to a fifth pathway graduate upon paying $300. That's right, $300 will earn you an M.D., after they already have a credential that authorizes you to practice medicine. Why can't the stupid state legislators just grant these doctors the automatic right in the first place to style themselves "M.D." and get the affair over with, w/o charging $300? Or does the state really need the money so badly? Oh, well, 106 postings wasted on this topic, and mine is the 107th. (BTW, my father is a foreign-trained physician here in TX, albeit an M.D. [Philippine graduate, been practicing in the U.S. for over 30 years from start of residency to today], so there is no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of competent foreign physicians in the U.S., so this post is NOT at all an insult to foreign-trained doctors)

New York State Education Department/University of the State of New York Office of the Professions

http://www.op.nysed.gov/article131.htm

I wish my physician father had been kind enough to talk me into dentistry.

 

[cel083]

I wish my physician father had been kind enough to talk me into dentistry.

My physician father did not talk me into dentistry. I wanted to go into medicine first, but I decided I wasn't interested in treating anything below the neck later in college. Besides, I decided that if I don't get into a specialty, I would be more than happy to spend my the rest of my life doing dental checkups and cleanings rather than full-body ones.

 

[happy snake]

If you clear the USMLEs and make it through the higher standards (score-wise) that FMGs are held to, I don't care where you trained. You've earned the alphabets.

FMGs go through a more selective process, I believe. And getting an MBBS is hyper-competitive (as far as pure academics is concerned) in most countries.

So I believe the boards to be a greater leveler.

 

[Tired]

Nobody should have to endure years of the sadly xenophobic scenario of.....

Pt: "Are you a real doctor?"
Doc: "Yes"
Pt: "Are you sure, I thought doctors had to be an MD?"
Doc: "I got my degree outside the US."
Pt: "I WANT SOMEBODY ELSE!!! NOW!!"

That may be a little too dramatic, but I'm sure any foreign doctor who uses his proper degree title experiences something similar at least several times a year. This is not to mention the number of patients a private practice doc would lose simply because people wouldn't understand his/her degree and go to another doc who had an MD/DO.

So your argument is that doctors should be allowed to lie to patients because some of them may be too stupid to understand? What other things should we be allowed to lie about in order to prevent patients from switching doctors? Disciplinary action? Lawsuits? How about this scenario:

Doc: "I'm going to remove the tumor from your brain."
Pt: "Are you a real Neurosurgeon?"
Doc: "Yes."
Pt: "I though Neurosurgeons had to be board certified?"
Doc: "Well, not in Somalia."
Pt: "I WANT ANOTHER DOCTOR NOW!"

 

[happy snake]

I agree with you. FMG's are adequately trained to be physicians or "MD's" but acquired their degrees outside of America. My Mom was a physician in Peru and when we came to the US, she passed her USMLE, did her residency and then started her own clinic. It's been over 20 years now. She has plenty of patients and new patients coming in daily- a testament to her ability to offer medical services in America, much like AMG's.

nicely put.

 

[masterMood]

These threads are stupid. So is the thread on all the FMGS taking over U.S. residency spots.

 

[DCDAWG]

this is pathetic...I don't even know why I'm commenting on it.

this topic was started by a **** disturber.

let's get the facts straight. The MD degree is derived from the latin term Medicinae Doctor, or "Teacher of Medicine" It's an academic degree...it's generally completed in 4 years, plus completing PGY training in a specific field after becoming board certified, they are able to practice medicine. The MD is a professional doctorate degree, not a research degree.

The same goes for the commonwealth countries. UK, Australia, New Zealand etc. The MBBS, MB ChB, are EXACTLY the same. They are typically completed in 5-6 years, versus 4. In my opinion, I would rather study in a 6 year program, than a 4 year program, but that's beside this little silly post.

Anyone who has earned the MBBS, MB ChB degrees are ENTITLED to call themselves Doctors. That is set by international standard according to the World Health Organization. Period.

I just want to point out that the 6 years needed to complete the MBBS, MB and ChB degrees includes the 4 years of college. So they finish two year before us here in the states.

 

[Northerner]

So your argument is that doctors should be allowed to lie to patients because some of them may be too stupid to understand? What other things should we be allowed to lie about in order to prevent patients from switching doctors? Disciplinary action? Lawsuits? How about this scenario:

Doc: "I'm going to remove the tumor from your brain."
Pt: "Are you a real Neurosurgeon?"
Doc: "Yes."
Pt: "I though Neurosurgeons had to be board certified?"
Doc: "Well, not in Somalia."
Pt: "I WANT ANOTHER DOCTOR NOW!"

Exactly. People seem to really struggle with comprehending that if you generalize to say: "ALL foreign doctors are equally trained to U.S. doctors", you're including all the permutations along the vast spectrum of medical education that exists. There are too many what if scenarios that scare the **** out of me to accept that generalization.

And if you generalize to say: "well, if they passed the USMLE, they're the same as a U.S. grad". ....seriously? You think just passing the USMLE is good enough to be your doctor? I bet if I put an ad in the paper offering an MD for 10 months of hard studying charging $1,000 for review books and $2,000 in prep courses and then signing them up to take the Steps, I'd be churning out doctors like there was no tomorrow. Make no mistake - we have a system for selecting, educating, training, testing, monitoring, and licensing our physicians in this country for a reason.

Does all of this mean: No foreign doctor = U.S. doctor? Of course ***ing not. There are plenty of examples of foreign physicians who've been trained equally to or better than us. Is it wrong to verify this? Of course ****ing not.

Is it wrong to give everyone with any "doctory" degree an MD after their name? Of course not. Think about it. How is it not hypocritical to refuse to let DO's (who are verifiably the exact equivalent of an MD, and in our own country/system) use "MD" but let someone from another system, another licensing oversight board, another degree (their equivalent though it may be), and who knows what else use it? What about NP's? Their training/expertise/training may be equivalent to the training a physician gets in Somalia. Is it right to grant an MD to the Somali but refuse it to our own NP? There are too many inconsistencies for me (or any reasonable person, in my opinion) to support something like this.

 

[happy snake]

The ones that are clearing the USMLEs and getting into US residencies are not getting their MBBS degrees on the black market. They are in fact writing their USMLEs and choosing to do their residencies all over again to be board certified and practice in the US. I don't think you can survive the process as an FMG if your degree's not worth its salt. There are considerable checks in place and every step is designed to keep out the quacks.

http://www.ecfmg.org/2007ib/ibfaq.html - read answer 3 here and
http://www.ecfmg.org/creds/index.html and
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/10141.html

And yes, if you clear your USMLEs in the US and the ECFMG thinks you have it in you to doctor in the US, you are just as much an MD as any that was trained in the US to begin with. How good of an doctor you are...well, that your practice will tell.

 

[Repeat]

Who cares? They all mean the same, so why whine about a couple of letters?

👍

 

[Tired]

Who cares? They all mean the same, so why whine about a couple of letters?

👍

You still don't get it. The issue is not whether an MBBS or any other degree is functionally equivalent to an MD. The issue is whether or not it is appropriate to lie to your patients about your qualifications. An foreign-trained doctor with an MBBS should advertise himself as such, because that's the degree he has. He doesn't have an MD, so he shouldn't say he does.

Why is this important? Because people have the right to choose their doctor based on any criteria they choose. I personally would not go to a non-American trained physician, and that's my right. A foreign-trained doctor who really believes in their qualifications would never consider pretending to be something they're not.

 

[happy snake]

You still don't get it. The issue is not whether an MBBS or any other degree is functionally equivalent to an MD. The issue is whether or not it is appropriate to lie to your patients about your qualifications. An foreign-trained doctor with an MBBS should advertise himself as such, because that's the degree he has. He doesn't have an MD, so he shouldn't say he does.

Why is this important? Because people have the right to choose their doctor based on any criteria they choose. I personally would not go to a non-American trained physician, and that's my right. A foreign-trained doctor who really believes in their qualifications would never consider pretending to be something they're not.

It's basically misrepresentation. I don't know if there are many that actually do this.

 

[Kappy1]

Personally I think there should be three designations for physician's in this country. Look only an idea so no need to jump down my throat. I think MD's who go to US medical schools should have an MD-A designation. Osteopathic physicians should have an MD-O title. Foriegn MD's or MD equivelent degree's should have a MD-F designation. That way you stop the confusion. Patients then will be able to then choose their doctor with a better understanding of the degree their doctor has.

 

[TRAMD]

Personally I think there should be three designations for physician's in this country. Look only an idea so no need to jump down my throat. I think MD's who go to US medical schools should have an MD-A designation. Osteopathic physicians should have an MD-O title. Foriegn MD's or MD equivelent degree's should have a MD-F designation. That way you stop the confusion. Patients then will be able to then choose their doctor with a better understanding of the degree their doctor has.

Oddly, I kinda like this idea. Maybe I just think it would be cool to be MD-A. But the poor IMGs would be MD-F. It seems similar to a grading scale.

I like how you specify "no need to jump down my throat." That seems to happen a little too often. I do wonder if we were discussing issues face to face if everyone would be so bold . . . er, rude.

 

[TRAMD]

My physician father did not talk me into dentistry. I wanted to go into medicine first, but I decided I wasn't interested in treating anything below the neck later in college. Besides, I decided that if I don't get into a specialty, I would be more than happy to spend my the rest of my life doing dental checkups and cleanings rather than full-body ones.

It was my round-a-bout way of saying I think dentistry is an excellent choice.

 

[happy snake]

Personally I think there should be three designations for physician's in this country. Look only an idea so no need to jump down my throat. I think MD's who go to US medical schools should have an MD-A designation. Osteopathic physicians should have an MD-O title. Foriegn MD's or MD equivelent degree's should have a MD-F designation. That way you stop the confusion. Patients then will be able to then choose their doctor with a better understanding of the degree their doctor has.

It's an idea, but there will be problems if we start doing this. Now, there'll be one more thing to worry about while referring patients around. It also sets up for segregration among the MDs and that, I feel, is not a road we should be going down. I feel, so long as all foreign docs are held to one standard and that that standard is set by the AMA though the ECFMG, we have a working system. If patients are so worried about where their docs have trained, the certificates and degrees are displayed on the walls, and you have the right to ask the med. staff before making your appointment.

Also, most DO's wouldn't want to be titled 'MD'.

 

[happy snake]

It was my round-a-bout way of saying I think dentistry is an excellent choice.

True.

 

[Kappy1]

Also, most DO's wouldn't want to be titled 'MD'.

The segragation that you are worried is there anyhow. There are MD's and DO's.

True, but their is a strong minority who are in favor to adding a M somwhere in the DO title. A pole taken here on SDN (granted it isn't scientific) showed about 253 people in favor for a change, and 283 in favor of keeping the DO title.

 

[Kappy1]

I like how you specify "no need to jump down my throat." That seems to happen a little too often. I do wonder if we were discussing issues face to face if everyone would be so bold . . . er, rude.

I always put it that way. People are way too high strung on this forum.😉

 

[lilmdroses]

This MD=DO=MBBS crap has gone too far. There is only one legitimate MD degree in the United States and thats for those who graduated from AMERICAN allopathic schools. I don't care what tests you took or how many years of school you had to go to in your podunk country, in the United Sates of America American MD>all. Some of the ideas in this thread are ridiculous, it seems you guys think just passing the USMLE 1-3 makes you an MD. What if some random persons studied for and passed USMLE on their own, should we give MD degrees to them all?

👎 This statement is just wrong on many levels. First of all, if you think the US is such a great country...why did you not bother to spell it right??? Secondly, if you believe that other countries are "podunk" in comparison, which isn't even a really qualified descriptor in the english language, then it leads me to wonder where in fact you are in your medical training, if anywhere at all. Lastly...I do hope I never run into you when I'm in dire medical need. I'll just go to one of the several hundreds of open minded doctors (D.O., M.D....whatever) who are more concerned with their patient's well being than what the other guy is putting by his last name.

 

[happy snake]

The segragation that you are worried is there anyhow. There are MD's and DO's.

True, but their is a strong minority who are in favor to adding a M somwhere in the DO title. A pole taken here on SDN (granted it isn't scientific) showed about 253 people in favor for a change, and 283 in favor of keeping the DO title.

I didn't know that about the poll! That's kind of a bummer. Working as hard for the DO degree and then feeling you'd rather be titled a MD. I guess the more specialized a DO doc becomes, and the farther they move from family practice, etc, they use OMT less and then there's less meaning really in being called a DO vs. a MD. I guess we could just have MDs (not because they're better or anything, but because the general public more readily understands the alphabets in comparison to DO, MBBS, etc) and make OMT an elective in MD school. Die hard DO fans won't want this, I guess.

 

[UCDavisdude]

I once found a book by a DO, MD. No joke. I wonder what the story was with that one.

this is not as odd as you think. while volunteering in the e.r, and looking at the e.r roster/composite on the wall, about 30-40 percent were d.o m.d. i believe the story concerning this is that those d.o were granted the m.d after completing an allopathic residency. so both sets of letters are used. and these r young doctors, not the ones from the 70's.

 

[Tired]

👎 This statement is just wrong on many levels. First of all, if you think the US is such a great country...why did you not bother to spell it right??? Secondly, if you believe that other countries are "podunk" in comparison, which isn't even a really qualified descriptor in the english language, then it leads me to wonder where in fact you are in your medical training, if anywhere at all. Lastly...I do hope I never run into you when I'm in dire medical need. I'll just go to one of the several hundreds of open minded doctors (D.O., M.D....whatever) who are more concerned with their patient's well being than what the other guy is putting by his last name.

So what you're saying is that MBBS=MD because a guy on SDN can't spell?

Silly foreigner.

 

[CatsandCradles]

In the United Kingdom and many other Commonwealth countries, the M.D. is a higher doctoral degree reserved for those who have contributed significantly to the academic study of medicine or surgery[7]. An M.D. typically involves either a number of publications or a thesis. They may follow the same research learning pathway as the first two years of a Ph.D., allowing clinical fellows to pursue combinations of laboratory and clinical-based research under the supervision of senior clinical and research members of the School. Given good progress, and by adding a further year, students can convert to a Ph.D. programme[citation needed].

Alternately, the M.D. may be a degree granted retrospectively to medical graduates after a body of previously published research is submitted. This may be considered equivalent to a Ph.D. (e.g., [5]), or may even require a Ph.D. as a pre-requisite (e.g., [6]).

The entry-level professional degree in these countries for the practice of medicine is that of Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (M.B., B.S. or M.B., Ch.B.), earned with typically four to six years of studies and training at university. The four-year courses are "graduate-entry" and can only be entered with a previously completed 2 year degree in a relevant subject (usually biology or biochemistry).

There is also a similar advanced professional degree, the Master of Surgery (usually Ch.M. or M.S., but M.Ch. in Ireland, Wales and Oxford and M.Chir. at Cambridge), which is obtained after an M.B., Ch.B. or M.B., B.S.

...I guess this means European MDs are top dog over all us Yankees.😱

 

[ladynice]

If DOs would call themselves MDs there would be no DOs left except outside of the US were osteopaths are not physicians and will NEVER be equivalent of allopaths.

 

[cyclohexanol]

If DOs would call themselves MDs there would be no DOs left except outside of the US were osteopaths are not physicians and will NEVER be equivalent of allopaths.

And...?

 

[happy snake]

...I guess this means European MDs are top dog over all us Yankees.😱

The four/five years in med school earns them the Bachelor of Medicine/Bachelor of Surgery degree. Then, when they are Doctors and they decide to do some research, they have to train in a post-graduate Master's program for a tad over a year to earn the MD degree. So they can actually say, Dr. XYZ, MBBS, MD, with the MD being a whole other degree, sort of like a Master's here.

 

[Hayden2102]

The four/five years in med school earns them the Bachelor of Medicine/Bachelor of Surgery degree. Then, when they are Doctors and they decide to do some research, they have to train in a post-graduate Master's program for a tad over a year to earn the MD degree. So they can actually say, Dr. XYZ, MBBS, MD, with the MD being a whole other degree, sort of like a Master's here.

Actually it's more like a PhD rather than a Masters.

 

[DocBR]

this is not as odd as you think. while volunteering in the e.r, and looking at the e.r roster/composite on the wall, about 30-40 percent were d.o m.d. i believe the story concerning this is that those d.o were granted the m.d after completing an allopathic residency. so both sets of letters are used. and these r young doctors, not the ones from the 70's.

I am pretty sure the only way you can become M.D., D.O. (or some variant of that) is to complete both programs from separate degree granting institutions. A few years ago one of the Caribbean schools offered a 1 year internet based (I think) course for D.O.s to receive an M.D.

 

[happy snake]

Actually it's more like a PhD rather than a Masters.

Well, timewise, atleast in India, post graduate MD training lasts about 2-3 years. That's about half the length of a typical PhD in the US. Also, The MBBS is a Bachelor's degree in medicine and the MD or MS are Master's degrees. There is a higher level- the PhD option.

Here is something from http://www.webindia123.com/career/Medicine/prosp.html (not at all a definitive source, but this info, I verified, is true). "The basic or degree level qualification for a medical profession is MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine And Bachelor Of Surgery) which is of 5 1/2 years (including internship) duration. At the post graduate level, there is specialisation in Medicine (MD) and Surgery (MS). Post Graduate Programs (MD or MS) usually run for 3 years. For specialisation, qualification is MBBS + MD or MS or Diplomas in the various areas of specialisation. Doctors with Post Graduation (MD or MS or M.Sc in medicine) can further specialise by doing Ph.D in any specialised area of medicine. MD or MS holders can complete the Doctoral Programme (Ph.D) in 2 years and M.Sc medicine holders in 3 years.

Hope this clears up some of the confusion.

 

[Blade28]

this is not as odd as you think. while volunteering in the e.r, and looking at the e.r roster/composite on the wall, about 30-40 percent were d.o m.d. i believe the story concerning this is that those d.o were granted the m.d after completing an allopathic residency. so both sets of letters are used. and these r young doctors, not the ones from the 70's.

Really? That's strange. Where was this? 😕

 

[MWillie]

👎 This statement is just wrong on many levels. First of all, if you think the US is such a great country...why did you not bother to spell it right??? Secondly, if you believe that other countries are "podunk" in comparison, which isn't even a really qualified descriptor in the english language, then it leads me to wonder where in fact you are in your medical training, if anywhere at all. Lastly...I do hope I never run into you when I'm in dire medical need. I'll just go to one of the several hundreds of open minded doctors (D.O., M.D....whatever) who are more concerned with their patient's well being than what the other guy is putting by his last name.

Did you make a new account just to argue with me? I am honored. I can assure you that I am doing fine in my medical training and that my English is probably as good as yours if not somewhat better. You are free to avoid my services as much as you please. Personally when I'm in dire medical need I could care less how open minded my doctors are. I suppose they should give each physician a test to determine how open minded they are and then you can avoid the ones that do not agree with your political views.

 

[GreenShirt]

Personally I think there should be three designations for physician's in this country. Look only an idea so no need to jump down my throat. I think MD's who go to US medical schools should have an MD-A designation. Osteopathic physicians should have an MD-O title. Foriegn MD's or MD equivelent degree's should have a MD-F designation. That way you stop the confusion. Patients then will be able to then choose their doctor with a better understanding of the degree their doctor has.

If someone wants to know where their doctor went to school they can look it up. Your system just propagates public misconceptions about medical education. You assume MD-A have superior education over all else. The US ranks 36th amongst all industrialized nation in the quality of our medical system and really low in mortality and life expectancy standards as well. One might say that physician training in Europe or Japan is far superior, so maybe we should also include MD-E or MD-J designations so people can make better decisions.

This classification also doesn't take into account the fact that most FMGs complete American residencies and take the USMLE. Residency is where you do your real training, med school is just memorizing a bunch of things anyone in the world can learn by picking up a few textbooks. Maybe we should expand your classification to MD-F-AR and MD-F-FR for foreign graduates who did residency here or abroad.......or better yet, why don't people just do their own research and figure out their doctor's resume. Personally, I prefer a Harvard-trained FMG to do brain surgery on me over an American trained physician from a bottom tier school/residency.

In the end, yes, you technically should just go by want your school grants. But if it was such a big problem with our health care system, I would imagine that the AMA would have done something about it by now.

Not worth losing sleep over...and the people who are losing sleep over this are the ones who are conerned about this due to pride. You hold onto the pre-med belief that being an MD somehow makes you special and superior to the rest of the population. GET OVER IT! You're in medical school and it's time to stop thinking about yourself and start thinking about your future patients and their needs.

 

[Northerner]

Not worth losing sleep over...and the people who are losing sleep over this are the ones who are conerned about this due to pride. You hold onto the pre-med belief that being an MD somehow makes you special and superior to the rest of the population. GET OVER IT! You're in medical school and it's time to stop thinking about yourself and start thinking about your future patients and their needs.

Obviously you're describing both ends of the spectrum - should people NOT CARE AT ALL about who uses "MD" or feel protective of their training and degree? Of course not. Should people FREAK OUT and bring legal cases against the government for allowing FMGs to use "MD" in some instances? Of course not.

The point of your pseudo-lecture at the end of this post was clear and legitimate, but you can't fault people for having an opinion on where the line between "yes, you can use it" and "no, you just can't" falls in such a fuzzy area.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

this is not as odd as you think. while volunteering in the e.r, and looking at the e.r roster/composite on the wall, about 30-40 percent were d.o m.d. i believe the story concerning this is that those d.o were granted the m.d after completing an allopathic residency. so both sets of letters are used. and these r young doctors, not the ones from the 70's.

I've seen something similar on a computer based system at two hospitals I've worked at. Regardless of degree, any selection available under "ordering physician" automatically comes up with MD after it so you see something along the lines of:
"Dr. David K. Murphy, DO, MD (Pulmonary/CCM)"

It has nothing to do with them (at least in the case of the hospitals I've worked at) earning a second degree, it was just a mistake in the software. I would bet this is the case if the roster is generated electronically, as it is in most hospitals now.

 

[Hayden2102]

Well, timewise, atleast in India, post graduate MD training lasts about 2-3 years. That's about half the length of a typical PhD in the US. Also, The MBBS is a Bachelor's degree in medicine and the MD or MS are Master's degrees. There is a higher level- the PhD option.

Here is something from http://www.webindia123.com/career/Medicine/prosp.html (not at all a definitive source, but this info, I verified, is true). "The basic or degree level qualification for a medical profession is MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine And Bachelor Of Surgery) which is of 5 1/2 years (including internship) duration. At the post graduate level, there is specialisation in Medicine (MD) and Surgery (MS). Post Graduate Programs (MD or MS) usually run for 3 years. For specialisation, qualification is MBBS + MD or MS or Diplomas in the various areas of specialisation. Doctors with Post Graduation (MD or MS or M.Sc in medicine) can further specialise by doing Ph.D in any specialised area of medicine. MD or MS holders can complete the Doctoral Programme (Ph.D) in 2 years and M.Sc medicine holders in 3 years.

Hope this clears up some of the confusion.

That must be just an Indian thing. In Australia and elsewhere it's like I described.

 

[da8s0859q]

Not worth losing sleep over...and the people who are losing sleep over this are the ones who are conerned about this due to pride. You hold onto the pre-med belief that being an MD somehow makes you special and superior to the rest of the population. GET OVER IT! You're in medical school and it's time to stop thinking about yourself and start thinking about your future patients and their needs.

I do think that people should be rightfully proud to have MD after their name - after all, it's a hell of a lot of work, and dammit, they deserve some credit for what they're doing - but otherwise, agreed with GS here.

 

[UCDavisdude]

Really? That's strange. Where was this? 😕

uc davis medical center emergency room area 1. this is where the composite is located (pictures of the e.r docs with thier institution names and thier degrees).

 

[UCDavisdude]

I've seen something similar on a computer based system at two hospitals I've worked at. Regardless of degree, any selection available under "ordering physician" automatically comes up with MD after it so you see something along the lines of:
"Dr. David K. Murphy, DO, MD (Pulmonary/CCM)"

It has nothing to do with them (at least in the case of the hospitals I've worked at) earning a second degree, it was just a mistake in the software. I would bet this is the case if the roster is generated electronically, as it is in most hospitals now.

well, at ucd mc, there were physicians who had only an m.d, only a d.o, and others with both on the composite, so im sure its not a comp glitch in the ucdmc case.

 

[Miami_med]

Since you learn 90% about practicing medicine in residency anyway, I'm really failing to understand why someone from a foreign country who successfully does this in the US shouldn't be able to accept an MD if such an option exists. When someone says that they are an MD in the US, we don't know if the means Harvard, Miami, Arkasnas, or Nebraska. It's really irrelevant, as the purpose is to imply a minimal level of competence. A patient who wants to look further into this would be more than welcome. I don't think that converting one degree to another nation's equivalent degree is lying.

P.S. These are the most fun threads on SDN 😎

 

[pharmdch]

I'm a pharmacist, so you could say that I'm impartial. What I find interesting is that the majority of you appear to have no objection to foreign physicians using the MD title to avoid confusing patients with unfamiliar degrees, but most of you are vehemently opposed to offering osteopathic physicians the same privilege. It strikes me as a double standard.

Some have defended the position on the grounds that the foreign graduates are trained pursuant to the allopathic model, and their degree is therefore equivalent to the MD. It seems to me, though, that the differences between the allopathic and osteopathic models are exaggerated. Honestly, with the exception of learning OMM, does the DO curriculum really deviate significantly from MD curriculum? Is there any sensible reason to consider foreign educated allopathic physicians more your equal than osteopathic physicians?

Granted, I realize that there are probably many osteopathic physicians who are not interested in using the MD title, but there are many who would jump at the opportunity for the same reason as the foreign graduates. Outside the medical community (and to some degree even inside it) the DO designation is not widely recognized; most Americans do not know that a DO is essentially the same as an MD. Frankly, I didn't know anything about them until researching healthcare careers prior to pharmacy school. They constantly complain about having to qualify their credentials.

The bottom line is that a U.S. DO receives training virtually identical to a U.S. MD. They take similar or equivalent tests, they work in the same practice settings, and they perform the same tasks. They shouldn't be denied the right to use the MD title if it's permissable for foreign graduates with a different degree to do so. Of course, there would then be little point in offering the DO path, as OMM could simply be an optional component of the MD curriculum...but that's another discussion. Everyone should just use the title conferred unto them.

 

[Hayden2102]

Why oh why continue to dredge up this topic...