Hero DO

[metalmd06]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hero MD?

Ok, so we all know DO = MD in this country, correct? Most educated people that I have spoken with seem to have this perspective, and even those who have asked me what it actually is agree with this sentiment.

Anyway, after seeing ryserr21's avitar and sig, I can't help but point out that the exposure and recognition problems that Osteopathic Medicine faces are a direct consequence of things like this happening:

"Richard Jadick (my avatar) is a DO, he graduated from NYCOM. He's not an MD. Screw Newsweek for not wanting to "confuse their readers"

And I believe, that remedying situations like this will eventually solve these "recognition" problems (I also believe that they will eventually solve themselves as Osteopathic Medicine becomes more competitive, desirable and more Osteopathic Physicians enter practice, this is obviously a step backward in that process).

We've seen some recent exposure in the form of News Features and AOA campaigning, but something also has to be done to prevent covering up a story like this. Dr. Jadick is obviously a brave and courageous doctor. He's also a DO, and the public should know that. He probably didn't have a say in this and granted, if Newsweek knocks on your door you generally don't make demands, but the AOA should have backed him up on this.

This kind of thing really makes me sick. It doesn't take an inch away from what he did, but God, this crap has to stop. Why couldn't newsweek run a cooresponding feature on Osteopathic Medicine if it was so worried about confusing its readers?

Anybody else feel the same way?

 

[TexasTriathlete]

I don't really give a ****. Perhaps my perspective on the matter will change when I am a DO myself.

Posted via Mobile Device

 

[engineeredout]

Why couldn't newsweek run a cooresponding feature on Osteopathic Medicine if it was so worried about confusing its readers?

Because people are idiots, plain and simple.

 

[metalmd06]

Yeah, but with people constantly debating this nonsense, it seems to me the solution is there being trampled and making it more difficult for DOs to get the recognition they deserve.

Mind you, future posters, this is the first I've heard or seen of this article, which is actually old (which I read today). I probably should have done a search because there is an entire thread about this already. From now on, every topic I have an idea about, I'm going to search. I hate being flamed.

 

[RySerr21]

Who Is This Richard Jadick Fellow?????

 

[TexasTriathlete]

I think this issue will work itself out naturally. Its just going to take some time.

Posted via Mobile Device

 

[DragonWell]

There was a lot of discussion about this when the issue came out. Search around for the threads if you're interested.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Hero MD?

Ok, so we all know DO = MD in this country, correct? Most educated people that I have spoken with seem to have this perspective, and even those who have asked me what it actually is agree with this sentiment.

Anyway, after seeing ryserr21's avitar and sig, I can't help but point out that the exposure and recognition problems that Osteopathic Medicine faces are a direct consequence of things like this happening:

"Richard Jadick (my avatar) is a DO, he graduated from NYCOM. He's not an MD. Screw Newsweek for not wanting to "confuse their readers"

And I believe, that remedying situations like this will eventually solve these "recognition" problems (I also believe that they will eventually solve themselves as Osteopathic Medicine becomes more competitive, desirable and more Osteopathic Physicians enter practice, this is obviously a step backward in that process).

We've seen some recent exposure in the form of News Features and AOA campaigning, but something also has to be done to prevent covering up a story like this. Dr. Jadick is obviously a brave and courageous doctor. He's also a DO, and the public should know that. He probably didn't have a say in this and granted, if Newsweek knocks on your door you generally don't make demands, but the AOA should have backed him up on this.

This kind of thing really makes me sick. It doesn't take an inch away from what he did, but God, this crap has to stop. Why couldn't newsweek run a cooresponding feature on Osteopathic Medicine if it was so worried about confusing its readers?

Anybody else feel the same way?

Honestly, I wouldn't look at it as a dis to Osteopathic medicine or an indication that people really wouldn't understand/know what a DO is (surprisingly almost everyone I speak with does), more that huge magazine companies know how to advertise and sell magazines. Some editor or PR type person decided that this was the catchiest, most attention grabbing title, which means more copies sold and more money for Newsweek. Should they have done the ethical thing and put DO? In my opinion, yes. Do media outlets do this kind of crap in every way shape and form to hook people into paying for their product - be it a misleading commercial for a tv show, paying movie reviewers give crappy movies good reviews, or bending the truth to sell a magazine ? Yes. It's business. There was also a lot of contention and disapproval concerning the article and Newsweek printed a retraction. I think it's important that DOs/the AOA correct mistakes like this, but remember that they are physicians first.

 

[RySerr21]

Honestly, I wouldn't look at it as a dis to Osteopathic medicine or an indication that people really wouldn't understand/know what a DO is (surprisingly almost everyone I speak with does), more that huge magazine companies know how to advertise and sell magazines. Some editor or PR type person decided that this was the catchiest, most attention grabbing title, which means more copies sold and more money for Newsweek. Should they have done the ethical thing and put DO? In my opinion, yes. Do media outlets do this kind of crap in every way shape and form to hook people into paying for their product - be it a misleading commercial for a tv show, paying movie reviewers give crappy movies good reviews, or bending the truth to sell a magazine ? Yes. It's business. There was also a lot of contention and disapproval concerning the article and Newsweek printed a retraction. I think it's important that DOs/the AOA correct mistakes like this, but remember that they are physicians first.

well said. 👍. still equally as irritating, just for a different reason. i guess thats life. *sigh*

 

[Tyc00nman]

Does anyone here genuinely think there is an apparent academic discrepancy between the curriculum at DOs and MDs?

Is there any formulaic way of gauging the discrepancy if there is one? USMLE scores comparing MD students to DOs or specialty pleacement perhaps?

 

[BeachBlondie]

Lemme break it down.

The reason that there is such an...uneasiness when DOs are brought about is because it is such a new subsect of medicine in comparison to the grand spectrum of healing. The general public is wary of doctors as it is, then when one throws a different pair of letters onto the back of a name, people get confused.

All cynicism aside, you have to treat this nation like a big toddler: lead it by the hand and instruct it. It will take a great deal of time and publicity for DOs to hold the same merit as MDs, not because we are any different but because the public is relatively in the dark about it.

Honestly, how many of us really new about DOs for as long as we've known about MDs?

As with any movement, all it takes is time and integrity of the institution to validate it.

 

[RySerr21]

Does anyone here genuinely think there is an apparent academic discrepancy between the curriculum at DOs and MDs?

Is there any formulaic way of gauging the discrepancy if there is one? USMLE scores comparing MD students to DOs or specialty pleacement perhaps?

do you?? sure curriculums differ across every school, but they all teach the same ish....they HAVE too. we are all being prepared to be physicians. you can't categorize ALL DO schools together and ALL MD schools together and say "is there a discrpeancy between teh DO curriculum and the MD curriculum." it doesnt work like that. There is no DO curriculum. Nor is there an MD curriculum. There is a DMU curriculum...and a Harvard curriculum...and a NYCOM curriculum...and a Dartmouth curriculum....etc etc you get my point.

Do these curriculums have their strong and weak points? Sure, i'm sure everyone has their complaints. But in the long run they get the job done, or else they wouldn't be producing physicians year after year.

 

[Tyc00nman]

do you?? sure curriculums differ across every school, but they all teach the same ish....they HAVE too. we are all being prepared to be physicians. you can't categorize ALL DO schools together and ALL MD schools together and say "is there a discrpeancy between teh DO curriculum and the MD curriculum." it doesnt work like that. There is no DO curriculum. Nor is there an MD curriculum. There is a DMU curriculum...and a Harvard curriculum...and a NYCOM curriculum...and a Dartmouth curriculum....etc etc you get my point.

Do these curriculums have their strong and weak points? Sure, i'm sure everyone has their complaints. But in the long run they get the job done, or else they wouldn't be producing physicians year after year.

Perhaps my statement within the question was worded improperly. Do you think the lack of DO representation in competitive residencies here in the US is a reflection on the lack of academic prowess given by the respective medical school? Are DOs statistically scoring considerably lower than their MD counterparts on USMLEs? Or is the lack of DO representation due to other valid yet erroneous reasons?

 

[RySerr21]

Perhaps my statement within the question was worded improperly. Do you think the lack of DO representation in competitive residencies here in the US is a reflection on the lack of academic prowess given by the respective medical school? Are DOs statistically scoring considerably lower than their MD counterparts on USMLEs? Or is the lack of DO representation due to other valid yet erroneous reasons?

I'm not sure what statistics you are looking at to claim a "lack of representation," but also keep in mind that there are DO residencies where many DOs go to be trained in competitive residencies such as ortho or whatever it may be. I'm sure that is not the only factor, but it plays a role most definitely.

As far as the USMLE, I konw the DO pass rate is lower than the MD pass rate, but I dont know the percentages off the top of my head. I wanna say the DO pass rate is ilke 76 or something? But i dunno, dont quote me. Why is this? It could be b/c DOs are taking both the USMLE and COMLEX around the same time. Pretty wearing on the mind, no doubt. Also, from what I hear the tests are very different in terms of subjects they test hard on and the way they way they present their questions (COMLEX being more clinical oreinted while USMLE being more basic science stuff, i guess). Also, while at school DOs are preparing to pass the COMLEX, not the USMLE. It makes sense that they would do better on a test they have(hopefully) been taught how to ace. Keep in mind this is all my speculation here, i have no idea whether any of it is true or not, i'm just providing my opinion.

In conclusion, if there is in fact a "lack of representation" among the competitive specialaties, the reasoning is most definitely multifactorial and can not be attributed to one single factor like academic prowess or initials.

 

[DrBowtie]

do you?? sure curriculums differ across every school, but they all teach the same ish....they HAVE too. we are all being prepared to be physicians. you can't categorize ALL DO schools together and ALL MD schools together and say "is there a discrpeancy between teh DO curriculum and the MD curriculum." it doesnt work like that. There is no DO curriculum. Nor is there an MD curriculum. There is a DMU curriculum...and a Harvard curriculum...and a NYCOM curriculum...and a Dartmouth curriculum....etc etc you get my point.

Do these curriculums have their strong and weak points? Sure, i'm sure everyone has their complaints. But in the long run they get the job done, or else they wouldn't be producing physicians year after year.

While I agree with what you're saying, all the allopathic schools must pass LCME accredidation such that all of their curriculums are adequate and basically the same core curriculum.

The AOA or COCA or whoever actually does accredidation might have different standards and with the integration of OMM, there certainly are some differences between the DO and MD curriculum and within each individual school.

 

[scpod]

...Do you think the lack of DO representation in competitive residencies here in the US is a reflection on the lack of academic prowess given by the respective medical school?....

I don't see the lack of representation. DOs only make up about 7% of the total number of physicians. So there should be about 7 DO anesthesiologists for every 100 MD anesthesiologists. The ratio is much better than that at my hospital. When you can show me that there are less than that....then I'll start believing it.

 

[MaximusD]

Perhaps my statement within the question was worded improperly. Do you think the lack of DO representation in competitive residencies here in the US is a reflection on the lack of academic prowess given by the respective medical school? Are DOs statistically scoring considerably lower than their MD counterparts on USMLEs? Or is the lack of DO representation due to other valid yet erroneous reasons?

I can see through you. You are a troll.

 

[gasapple]

Hey Tyc00nman, I've got a grooming question of sorts for you: Do you have to wax between those two monstrous caterpillars above your eyes - or do you pluck? I've heard waxing is painful - and plucking takes a too long, prolonging the pain. What's the typical plan of attack on those puppies? Just curious...

I need to do something about mine:

 

[DiverDoc]

:troll: