Interview question: Why do YOU want MD, and not DO?

[AnEyeLikeMars]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Thanks...I had said "European" ancestry in my previous post because I wasn't certain of the exacts. What you are saying makes sense. I'm curious - does anyone know what it was(is) in latin?

I've been trying to find this out, and I've seen it called "medicinae doctor" a few times on different websites. I don't know how accurate this is though.

 

[Law2Doc]

I've been trying to find this out, and I've seen it called "medicinae doctor" a few times on different websites. I don't know how accurate this is though.

I vote for Medicinus Doctorus (majorus). 🙂

 

[run4boston]

my vote is "medicinae doctor" - "teacher of medicine"

 

[banana k]

law2, really? (as in DO's opposing merge) wow, that's interesting... i'd just assumed (i know, bad! slap!) that they'd support it on the basis of leveling the playing field for sort of a free-trade agreement in medicine. i'll have to suss this out. sorry for the assumption; i just keep running into so much elitism from the MD camp that i tend to cynically apply it everywhere, even though it's CLEARLY not everyone, and that's a terrible stereotype to make!

re the OP... i don't know for sure so this is 100% anecdotal, but i think you folks might be right about the difficulties of going overseas with a DO degree. in australia "osteopath" means something entirely different from "medical doctor". like, ENTIRELY different. more like a specialist physiotherapist or something. an MD, however, is also a weird degree overseas. basically anywhere but the US it refers to a PhD-doctoral level training in medicine rather than a clinical practice degree. the MD equivalent is MBBS, at least in oz. so if you were to apply for overseas residencies with an MD, you'd have to stipulate that your degree was an MBBS-level degree, unless you had achieved the even higher Doctor of Medicine degree. the point is that while you'd spend a lot of time explaining that yes, a DO is a practicing medical degree, you'd also spend a lot of time assuring them that your MD is also a valid degree.

lotsa alphabet soup if you ask me... hence why i think doing away with the alphabets and allowing competition between schools rather than between degrees would be a good thing. call that soviet all you want, and call me a bonehead all you want, but i don't see how that destroys free-market enterprise of ideas. actually i don't think that could at all unless you were standardising at the school level... which oddly enough is kind of what the bushies did 3.5 years ago with all primary and secondary education! wow, so are THEY commies as well? get a grip.

 

[Law2Doc]

.

 

[Law2Doc]

.

 

[Law2Doc]

law2, really? (as in DO's opposing merge) wow, that's interesting... i'd just assumed (i know, bad! slap!) that they'd support it on the basis of leveling the playing field for sort of a free-trade agreement in medicine. i'll have to suss this out. sorry for the assumption; i just keep running into so much elitism from the MD camp that i tend to cynically apply it everywhere, even though it's CLEARLY not everyone, and that's a terrible stereotype to make!

Yeah - here's a link to one of several discussion threads I saw a while back on the Osteo board about the AOA (not so much the AMA) reportedly being opposed to the combined match. I'm not sure if there has been any movement since then. http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=183043

 

[Dr JPH]

In my opinion wanting to become an MD to practice in certain foreign countries is entirely valid.

I feel that if I wanted to practice in England I would have gone to an MD school.

I think most of the other arguments don't make sense.

There are osteopathic surgical programs that send more people in subspecialty fellowships than comparable allopathic programs. At least thats the case in the Northeast.

 

[Law2Doc]

In my opinion wanting to become an MD to practice in certain foreign countries is entirely valid.

I feel that if I wanted to practice in England I would have gone to an MD school.

I think most of the other arguments don't make sense.

There are osteopathic surgical programs that send more people in subspecialty fellowships than comparable allopathic programs. At least thats the case in the Northeast.

Well, fellowships are a step beyond having matched someplace, so that really doesn't address whether DOs are at a disadvantage at the matching level (i.e residency - in particular at allo places) in fields such as surgery.

 

[beastmaster]

lotsa alphabet soup if you ask me... hence why i think doing away with the alphabets and allowing competition between schools rather than between degrees would be a good thing. call that soviet all you want, and call me a bonehead all you want, but i don't see how that destroys free-market enterprise of ideas. actually i don't think that could at all unless you were standardising at the school level... which oddly enough is kind of what the bushies did 3.5 years ago with all primary and secondary education! wow, so are THEY commies as well? get a grip.

Now you're a partisan bonehead? I don't see what Bush has to do with anything here. You're just grasping at straws because you rehashed some BS and got called on it.

 

[DrBowtie]

There are no rad/onc osteopathic residencies nor would OMT be useful in that specialty.

 

[Pharos]

my vote is "medicinae doctor" - "teacher of medicine"

Interesting...if this is the case, then it is getting much closer back to "medical doctor" than I had originally thought. Who knows? Obviously someone, but it may or may not be us. 😎

 

[banana k]

i dunno, i've heard of a few rads DO's clunking around. doubt it's easy but doable.

still not sure what the problem is with merging, in a factual sense? i mean all insults and boneheads and bipartisanship and who-wants-which and whatnot aside, what are the facts for and against merging? seriously, if you think i'm a bonehead about this, i don't mind hearing why. as long as things aren't standardised to the point of losing school-to-school individuality, i still don't quite understand how you're losing enterprise or creating an evil empire--can you explain to me why? forgive me, i am a Bear of Very Little Brain and i need this spelled out.

 

[DrMedic]

I actually got that question at Wright State when I interviewed. The interviewer was not a DO either. My answer was that I would like to do volunteer work abroad, and knew that it would be easier if I were an MD. But I am not the type that takes the easy way, so I decided to go to a DO school instead.

 

[Law2Doc]

i dunno, i've heard of a few rads DO's clunking around. doubt it's easy but doable.

still not sure what the problem is with merging, in a factual sense? i mean all insults and boneheads and bipartisanship and who-wants-which and whatnot aside, what are the facts for and against merging? seriously, if you think i'm a bonehead about this, i don't mind hearing why. as long as things aren't standardised to the point of losing school-to-school individuality, i still don't quite understand how you're losing enterprise or creating an evil empire--can you explain to me why? forgive me, i am a Bear of Very Little Brain and i need this spelled out.

Like any potential business merger, it's a lack of synergy thing -- if the benefits don't outweigh the burdens for both sides, you don't do the merger. I think the DO folks don't want to merge into the MD world (it would hardly be a merger of equals in terms of numbers), lose their identity, management, control, have to abide by AMA requirements, lose their exclusive residencies, have to meet certain MD acredition requirements, become the bottom tier (at least initially, in terms of admissions requirements) medical schools, and suddenly find their students competing on worse footing with the MD students (by not having their own residencies, etc.). On the other side, I think the MD world doesn't want to give up their monopoly control of a big chunk of medicine, (why break something that's working nicely) have to share management somewhat, and otherwise have to deal with a big influx of schools and doctors each with their own host of issues and problems.

I guess the benefits of merger would be the elimination of dual degrees for the same job, a common match system, and a single set of standards. Since the larger, more numerous group wins control in any largely democratic organization, it's understandable that the DO world might not be excited about the prospect of a merger, notwithstanding that some of its constituents (students) might.