Is DO really worth it? Which one should I choose, MD or DO??

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Mr. MD or DO

Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2001
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm a senior graduating this May.
Last year I applied to alot of med schools, but although my gpa is ok (Sci: 3.5 and overall: 3.6), I did terrible on my MCAT (24). Back then, I didn't even apply to any osteopathic schools and I still got some holds for interviews at this time. I had one successful interview but rejected me after a long time. Since I'm going to have to take a year off after graduation, I've leaned about osteopathy and it intersts me alot. I was willing to take the MCAT again and reapply to only allopathic schools, but now I think I want to apply to osteopathic schools upon my graduation. Then wait a year and enter in 2002 August. But remaining question is, is DO really worth it? Other than the philosophy, is their any major diffirence that might hinder the extent of medical practice in any way? What about the availability of residency programs? A lot of people have a perception that MD is higher or more extensive or accepted or authoritative...I'm very confused about what to do. I was so desperate after getting alot of rejection letters, i even considered forien med schools like Ross and St. George. But they didn't sound too promosing. But it's MD after all. And does anyone know the rank of osteopathic school in academics or prestige?
Thank you very much for your help in this time of my tribulation.

Members don't see this ad.
 
IMHO, rank and prestige mean very little in the everyday practice of medicine. Of course, I'm still very early in my medical education and have much to learn and experience. Obtaining resideny positions in the more competitive specialties may be a challenge...but not impossible. Also, I would advise against going to a DO school if you desire a career in academic medicine. Of course, their are DO schools with combined DO/PhD programs out there. However, if you simply desire to practice medicine like the rest of us...I see nothing wrong with going to a DO school.

[This message has been edited by Jason Park (edited 01-29-2001).]
 
If you have to ask this question, then you haven't done your homework. If, after doing your homework, you are still uncertain, I recommend you reapply to only allopathic schools. You seem to be overly concerned about the prestige (or the perception thereof) of titles and probably wouldn't be happy at an osteopathic school. Also, you need to work on your english. If your personal statement was as poorly written as your post, I can understand why you didn't get any interviews.



[This message has been edited by Neurogirl (edited 01-30-2001).]
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Why are there so many posters who can't spell or write properly?

Listen, if you are looking for someone to validate your sorrow, I can't help you out. Most of the posters on this site who have gotten in to medical schools (MD or DO) have had to go through a fair amount of rejection to get there. My advice? Figure out the pros and cons of going DO, decide whether you're willing to pay the price; and then, if you're still unsure, do what Neurogirl says.
 
If prestige is what you care for then I don't think you are going into medicine for the correct reason (if you make it). As Neurogirl said do your homework on the DO route and you will find the answer. If what you care about is to be able to practice medicine as a physician then the DO route is another option that we, here in America, are very lucky to have. By the way, do not underestimate DO schools, it is not that easy to get into them and the people on admission should be able to tell whether you are serious about it or not. At the end of the day whether you are a D.O. or an M.D. no one, especially the patients, is going to care. I know lots of MDs who work with DOs. It is only the pre-meds that make a big deal about the 2 letters. If you are good you are good no matter what letters you have after you name.

[This message has been edited by Hippocrates (edited 01-30-2001).]
 
Thank you everyone for your great criticisms. By the way, I'm sorry if I sounded little too unprofessional by saying all I care about is the title MD or prestige. I never meant to say that in the first place. I never even intended to underestimate DO either. Actually, I've been doing alot of research about DO and i think the philosophy of the osteopathic medicine parellels with mine. After countless counseling, I'm thinking about applying to only osteopathic schools. Not only, does that give you more options in terms of getting residency, but also skyrocketing projected demand in the future. 100,000 surplus of MD doctors and cutting back the number of residents in NY teaching hospitals are not that encouraging. The growing demand of preventive care and holistic view of human are other factors for my determination to pursue DO. If I didn't want DO, I'd probably retake the MCAT and simply reapply. 1-2 yrs of investment is incomparable to the career of a lifetime. I figured they are virtually the same (MD and DO); one just gives you another chance. Once again I apologize for my previous ignorance and thanks for those advices.
I greatly appreciate all your help.
 
Originally posted by Hippocrates:
If prestige is what you care for then I don't think you are going into medicine for the correct reason (if you make it). As Neurogirl said do your homework on the DO route and you will find the answer. If what you care about is to be able to practice medicine as a physician then the DO route is another option that we, here in America, are very lucky to have. By the way, do not underestimate DO schools, it is not that easy to get into them and the people on admission should be able to tell whether you are serious about it or not. At the end of the day whether you are a D.O. or an M.D. no one, especially the patients, is going to care. I know lots of MDs who work with DOs. It is only the pre-meds that make a big deal about the 2 letters. If you are good you are good no matter what letters you have after you name.

[This message has been edited by Hippocrates (edited 01-30-2001).]


i couldn't state it any better! thrilled to start at COMP in august
biggrin.gif


pritbir
 
Dr DO or MD

There is really no need to apologize. Your concerns were very legitimate. Though may not want to admit it, I believe most of us thought the issues that you brought up. At any rate, I applaud you for your courage in attempting to address your concerns. However, getting into a DO school is just as challenging as getting into a MD school. You know, I have friends who applied to both schools and was only admitted to MD schools and visa versa. I was fortunate that I had a choice because I was admitted into both.

I am going to give you the same advice that I gave to my friends who did not have a choice. I simply told them that their primary concern is becoming a physician, not the letters are placed behind the end of your last name. If I did not get into a DO school, I would probably be in one of the MD schools that I accepted to. Hey, I want to be a doctor. The differences between the schools are just added flavorings. If I could not become a real DO, I was going to incorporate the osteopathic philosophy in my practice ANYWAY. I was going to learn OMM in CME courses. So nothing was going to stop me into getting what I was wanted.

According to the AMA, Osteopathic and allopathic physicans are EQUAL. There is nothing that allopathic physicans can preform that osteopathic physicians cannot. However, only the osteopathic physician can perform manual manipulative medicine. So there are extra classes you must take in order to become an osteopathic physician.

Osteopathic physicians have staff privilages in allopathic medical centers throughout the country. Today, there is really no clear distinctions between MD and DO hospitals. Historically, DO hospitals were big money makers so the big MD medical centers purchased them. They simply intergrated into their medical center. There are no clear rivalry between the MDs and DOs in the hospital setting.
hope it helps

 
hi there,
the only thing I can add to the above is that there are hospitals in NY that actually PREFER DO's. AT least in this area, you will have no problems with what two letters are behind your last name... and you will have a few more tricks under your belt as OMM will give you a whole extra arsenal for treating patients. I am a third year at NYCOM and I cannot tell you how many times I have been asked on rotations by MD students to tech them OMM........ just my 0.02...
 
Rosebud,

What hospitals in the NY Metro Area "prefer" DOs? What is your basis for that statement?

Massapequa General Hospital, the area's ONLY osteopathic hospital, recently closed thus taking with it a bunch of rotation spots from NYCOM. According to friends of mine in the Class of 2003, this has created a logistical nightmare for NYCOM in scheduling the next round of clerkships.

I mention this only because in a state that has only had one osteopathic institution in its history, has only one osteopathic medical school, and has way fewer than 3,000 DOs, it doesn't seem likely that any hospital "prefers" DOs -- unless I'm reading your statement totally incorrectly. An article on osteopathic medicine about three or four years ago featured a NYCOM student who spoke of the acceptance of the profession in NYS. His comment was that despite the high visibility of the profession in New York, and much to his surprise, there are still some hospitals in the metro areas that have NEVER HEARD of DOs.

So your statement just sorta shocks me.


Tim W. of N.Y.C.
 
Originally posted by turtleboard:
Rosebud,

I strongly agree with turtleboard. Although I'm very interested and intrigued by the osteopathic medicine, it is true that at least for general public, DO is somewhat unknown. As much as I hate to mention it, many people choosing their HMO doctors, including my friends, just prefer and pick MDs only, not because they think MD's necessarily better than DO's but just because they are more familiar with. I know discrimination majorily occurs due to ignorance, but if that's the reality, it is something not to be taken lightly. Since we live in a society where title and numbers do represent the quality, we are forced in a way to enhance our numbers and title for this superficial reason. Your title and numbers can mean a great opportunity to be hired, perform, or even perception that brings many positive outcomes. I personally like DO and the whole philosophy. But if no one (at least for a while ) recognizes what it is, they won't trust them. And there's even a considerable possiblity that this trend might not even be due to the scarce number of DO's but also undercontribution/quality or even some political games. It's something we need to consider, not just for the sake of our career, but for the general public who will always be on more "comfortable" and more "well known" side in everything...even more so with their health and life.
 
Originally posted by turtleboard:
Rosebud,

What hospitals in the NY Metro Area "prefer" DOs? What is your basis for that statement?

Massapequa General Hospital, the area's ONLY osteopathic hospital, recently closed thus taking with it a bunch of rotation spots from NYCOM. According to friends of mine in the Class of 2003, this has created a logistical nightmare for NYCOM in scheduling the next round of clerkships.

I mention this only because in a state that has only had one osteopathic institution in its history, has only one osteopathic medical school, and has way fewer than 3,000 DOs, it doesn't seem likely that any hospital "prefers" DOs -- unless I'm reading your statement totally incorrectly. An article on osteopathic medicine about three or four years ago featured a NYCOM student who spoke of the acceptance of the profession in NYS. His comment was that despite the high visibility of the profession in New York, and much to his surprise, there are still some hospitals in the metro areas that have NEVER HEARD of DOs.

So your statement just sorta shocks me.


Tim W. of N.Y.C.

Tim
It seems like this group gets stuck on one word in an entire comment statement and run with it. At first the buzz word was prestige, now its prefer. There is no WAY who can tell me that hospital adminstators in New York hospitals have not heard of DO's. Rather you want to believe or not, DO's get residencies easily in New York hospitals. There are numerous of recuiters come to COM schools for promote their intership and residency programs. You have to realize that its no such thing as a strictly allopathic or osteopathic hospital anymore. DO's and MD's practice in both. Unless the hospital is very small, I can't see where you can have a purely allopathic physicians.
I didn't have a problem with her statement because I have heard the same thing from NY hospital recuiters. They have found that DO's simply out-performed the MDs. DO are more knowledgeable, work-harder. It could stem from DOs feel that they have something to prove, so they give it that extra mile.
The facts are there, its your choice if you want to believe it or not.

 
Members don't see this ad :)
Hey Mr.MDorDO it sounds like you have already made up your mind about which letters you want. I wish you the best of luck. One more thing though, with all respect, when you start worying about what other people think of you from litle of what they know of you, you have already began to lose your battle.
 
They have found that DO's simply out-performed the MDs. DO are more knowledgeable, work-harder. It could stem from DOs feel that they have something to prove, so they give it that extra mile.
The facts are there, its your choice if you want to believe it or not.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Angel:

I am a huge advocate of DOs and may in fact become one myself. Having said that, I will also say that the above quote from your post is quite ludicrous at best.

There is no way that anyone can legitimately say that DOs have been outperforming MDs, are more knowledgable, or work harder than MDs. Do you have data to back that up? I think not because it would be impossible to prove something like that.

....and by the way, I would be saying the same thing if you had said MDs outperform DOs, etc.etc.

 
Hi Mr. MDorDO,

How about if you just go get an MBA - go to Wall Street, be an investment banker. Big bucks. You want [prefer] prestige? Money talks, BS walks. You can buy all the prestige you want [prefer]. You could even give some of your money away - donations to the med school du jour, MD or DO. You'd still be helping people and you'd FEEL GOOD.
biggrin.gif


Seriously, I can only give you my perspective as a practicing doc. When I was a kid our family docs were DOs. I never even thought of becoming an MD. Once I decided to go to med school [3rd year of undergrad] I applied to a DO school and never looked back.

Being a DO does mean you have an "extra tool" in your little black bag, i.e., OMM, but there's a lot more to it than that. It's a philosophy - an ideology that pervades your education and training experiences, and your life thereafter. Hey, we were holistic when holistic wasn't cool.

Maybe you already know this, but DOs are trained to be primary care docs and that's what the vast majority of them wind up being. If what you live for is to become a brain surgeon you can sure do that, but you'll know how to be a primary care doc first. Good foundation.

I've always considered my medical education to be top notch - at least equal to and in most cases superior to that of the MDs I've crashed into in my travels. But that really doesn't make any difference to me. This is what I wanted. My experiences since graduation have included big city ER, Urgent Care, and Family Practice. I've worked in both MD and DO hospitals, including teaching hospitals - no problemo. For a small dose of reality, pull up the Cleveland Clinic website and check the CVs of the physicians on staff. You're gonna find some DOs.

My brother is a DO [FP]. He was accepted at Ohio State Med School but decided he wanted to be a DO. Right after internship he got snagged in the doctor draft and spent a year as a Battalion Surgeon in Viet Nam, then another year in the outpatient clinics at Valley Forge Military Hospital [now defunct, I think]. One of his classmates also went into the military - and stayed. That was Ron Blanck, DO, recently retired Surgeon General [3 stars] of the US Army and now top gun at TCOM. We have two DO cousins, one a radiologist, the other a career Navy doc [Rear Admiral]. In the military you are Captain Smith, MC [Medical Corps], not DO or MD. BTW, the military will pay for your education if you're willing to give back two for one [years].

As they told us during "Orientation" the first day of med school, "We've got the same books here they've got down the street [Jefferson, U of P, Hahnemann, etc.] - you'll get out of it what you put into it."

My advice? [You did ask, right?]
smile.gif
- Keep on with your research until you wake up some morning and know in your gut exactly what you want to do. As Joseph Campbell said, "Follow your bliss." The tough part is figuring out exactly what your bliss is.

Cheers,
Tom
PCOM '66
 
How bout that XFL...that sure was something eh?
 
Originally posted by CVPA:
They have found that DO's simply out-performed the MDs. DO are more knowledgeable, work-harder. It could stem from DOs feel that they have something to prove, so they give it that extra mile.
The facts are there, its your choice if you want to believe it or not.


Angel:

I am a huge advocate of DOs and may in fact become one myself. Having said that, I will also say that the above quote from your post is quite ludicrous at best.

There is no way that anyone can legitimately say that DOs have been outperforming MDs, are more knowledgable, or work harder than MDs. Do you have data to back that up? I think not because it would be impossible to prove something like that.

....and by the way, I would be saying the same thing if you had said MDs outperform DOs, etc.etc.

[/B][/QUOTE]

I appreciate your comments, however you did not accurately read my comments. I was expressing statements of Residency recuiters had told me. This is their findings. This DOES NOT mean that because it happens in several New York hospitals, it is a reflection of DOs and MDs across the nation.
To break it down for you, the DOs in these hospitals work harder, did their homework so that they can be very sharp during rounds. And they scored higher on examinations. Whenever you are in a minority group, you are going to give it that extra mile. Especially since many view persons from the majority (MDs) as the more superior figure.

Incidently, the MD and DO schools are not alike. Not just in terms that DO schools teaches OMM and MD schools doesn't. DOs school gives far more in-debt presentations of Cardio, Pulm, neuromuscularsketonal disorders...etc. than MD schools. Therefore, its unlike that they come from the same knowlege base. In other words, you need to do more homework. Its more to becoming a DO than the "Osteopathic Principles"

I hope this better clarify things up for you. Email again if you need more clarity.
Good luck in getting into medical school. I was one of the lucky ones who got in my first round. Hope the same for you

regards
Angela


To give you a behavior lession, anytime that a group of people is in the minority (DO), the minority will try exra harder to prove that they are just as good or better than persons who have historically been viewed upon as the superior figure (MD). Perhaps that is what the New York Hospital recuiters were referring in their comments of the overall DO's work performance. They have no reason to lie to me, as I don't have a reason to lie to you
smile.gif

As I stated in my previous comments the facts are there, its up to you to believe it or not.

 
Angela:

In re-reading your post, I don't believe I misread it at all. I realize that you were quoting the hospital recruiters and that their opinion may not represent that which you believe. Irrespective of that detail, I simply do not believe that the recruiters were correct in their conclusions. Their comments about MDs vs DOs are generalizations which attempt to characterize thousands of physicians across this country. In my opinion, it is simply an inaccurate and unsubstantiated conclusion.

As a side note, I would take what recruiters say with a grain of salt. Remember, they do have a personal agenda which often motivates then to scew the facts a bit if it serves their purpose.

Chris




[This message has been edited by CVPA (edited 02-07-2001).]
 
Originally posted by CVPA:
Angela:

In re-reading your post, I don't believe I misread it at all. I realize that you were quoting the hospital recruiters and that their opinion may not represent that which you believe. Irrespective of that detail, I simply do not believe that the recruiters were correct in their conclusions. Their comments about MDs vs DOs are generalizations which attempt to characterize thousands of physicians across this country. In my opinion, it is simply an inaccurate and unsubstantiated conclusion.

As a side note, I would take what recruiters say with a grain of salt. Remember, they do have a personal agenda which often motivates then to scew the facts a bit if it serves their purpose.

Chris

Chris
I thought your comment was very amusing that you actually believe a study will prove or support a something. Most of the bogus findings that you see in medicine is performed by studies. Those are the ones you take with a grain of salt! They're great in sales promotion. You have drug reps comming to hospitals will pop out a study to 'back-up their clain that the drug is'improved'. Who do you think paid for the study...'the drug reps company'. So take a wild guess what their findings will show.
Drugs are one example. Venilator companies come out and tell you they have the better vent. And they all pop out a study that allegedly proves it..so what. Studies don't prove anything, everything is really personal preference. Or the cheaper one wins! So spare me with your "I need to see a study kick!"

Even though you have incorporated your own words into my comment. It is your choice to add of subtact words as you please. However, you are asking for a real stretch to make me believe your interpretation of the intent of the recuiters, especially since you weren't present. Incidently, why should I take your opinion Do you have a study to support that recuiter often skew facts to serve their purpose?
smile.gif
I think not! See its real easy to throw this kind of nonsense back into your face.

Good luck in applying to medical school.
Angela
 
Angela:

OK, the first thing I want to say is, take a deep breath and while your at it, a Xanax.

Second, let me make sure I understand you perfectly because I don?t want to be accused of ?incorporating? my words into your comments again. You are making the correlation that since medical sales companies sometimes use biased studies to help promote their products, that studies in general don?t prove anything? Correct me if I am wrong, but didn?t you say you are a medical student or will soon be one? Do you not yet know that studies are crucial in the advancement of medicine? They are often, if not always, the basis on which new techniques and medical theories are based. What do you think MedLine is all about? How do you think medicine came up with the New York Heart Association?s Functional Classification of Angina? How did medicine determine that angioplasties have a shorter patency rate than Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting? Through clinical studies. Having said that, we are also taught to critically evaluate every study through statistical analysis to weed out the valid studies from the bogus studies. That is part of what is called ?peer review?. I think it is those bogus studies that you make reference to when you talked about ventilator and drug companies and I agree with you on that aspect. So in response to your first sentence, yes I do believe that studies prove and support many things in medicine.

Thirdly, I fail to see where I incorporated my words into your comments. I also don?t think you are obliged in any way to believe my opinion. I think you have lost track of something, Angela. This is, as you know, a public forum where people discuss topics and express opinions relevant to medicine. I merely expressed an opinion and the next thing I know your flying off the handle about bogus studies and me incorporating words into your comments. My comments were not meant to be a personal attack on you, but more a criticism of the recruiter?s statement about DOs vs MDs. That?s it.

So I guess your were right, that was nonsense that you threw back in my face.

Chris
 
Boy I sure love "Survivor"!
 
The new Survivor people are too pretty and too mean--three days of rice and they're out to kill each other. Where is the love, baby?
 
Originally posted by Angelado40:
DOs school gives far more in-debt presentations of Cardio, Pulm, neuromuscularsketonal disorders...etc. than MD schools.

I would assume that you have been a student at an MD and a DO school in order to make that statement, correct? But I would be wrong to assume that about you, wouldn't I? Sort of like how it is ridiculous for you to presume you know anything about the level of education that those of us in different schools are receiving. In your future posts, please try not to make such glaring accusations without any founding whatsoever.

Incidentally I would expect to receive the same response from some of my DO colleagues had I posted some crap about MD schools teaching renal phsysiology or neuro pathology more extensively than DO schools.

Oh, and I'd watch the new survivor, if I wasn't up till 4am every night this week studying for exams! Yeah, med school's fun!
biggrin.gif


[This message has been edited by Mango (edited 02-10-2001).]
 
I'm with ya Mango...my exams start Monday. I think I have like 9 exams next week...it's outta control! It's 4am right now and I'm contemplating calling it a night
smile.gif
 
You have made over 80 responses with in the past few months which leads me to believe that you spent a lot of time trying to pick pointless auguements with people over the internet. I chose not to return insultive comments toward you. I chose to remain mature. Unfortunately, I don't have as much time on my hands as you, you this is my last response on this.

What led to these so-called "crutial advancements" in medicine was not done by studies, it was done through non-bias EXPERIMENTATION & RESEARCH. Every company preform studies--rather its comparing soft-drinks or toliet paper. Studies are a dime a dozen. Perhaps you need to distinguish between the two.



Originally posted by CVPA:
Angela:

OK, the first thing I want to say is, take a deep breath and while your at it, a Xanax.

Second, let me make sure I understand you perfectly because I don?t want to be accused of ?incorporating? my words into your comments again. You are making the correlation that since medical sales companies sometimes use biased studies to help promote their products, that studies in general don?t prove anything? Correct me if I am wrong, but didn?t you say you are a medical student or will soon be one? Do you not yet know that studies are crucial in the advancement of medicine? They are often, if not always, the basis on which new techniques and medical theories are based. What do you think MedLine is all about? How do you think medicine came up with the New York Heart Association?s Functional Classification of Angina? How did medicine determine that angioplasties have a shorter patency rate than Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting? Through clinical studies. Having said that, we are also taught to critically evaluate every study through statistical analysis to weed out the valid studies from the bogus studies. That is part of what is called ?peer review?. I think it is those bogus studies that you make reference to when you talked about ventilator and drug companies and I agree with you on that aspect. So in response to your first sentence, yes I do believe that studies prove and support many things in medicine.

Thirdly, I fail to see where I incorporated my words into your comments. I also don?t think you are obliged in any way to believe my opinion. I think you have lost track of something, Angela. This is, as you know, a public forum where people discuss topics and express opinions relevant to medicine. I merely expressed an opinion and the next thing I know your flying off the handle about bogus studies and me incorporating words into your comments. My comments were not meant to be a personal attack on you, but more a criticism of the recruiter?s statement about DOs vs MDs. That?s it.

So I guess your were right, that was nonsense that you threw back in my face.

Chris

 

Mango,
Ohh! your reaction indicates that you attend an MD school. But Mango (cutey name), I DO know the level of education that persons of MD school is receiving, because I worked in a MD school, before I "jumped ship". MD and DO attend classes together at the univisity that I am attending So do not presume you know anything about me. At any rate, its a very simple process, all you have to do is to look at both curriulums and compare. Its easier with me because DOs and MDs attend classes together our first year, and some of us remain friends and study systems/domains for our second year. For instance, cardo was only 4 weeks (32 lectures and 1 lab) in the MD schools, whereas its 8 weeks (62 lectures and 3 labs) in DO schools. I can go on with the comparisons but if you are truly interested, all you need to do is to compare curriculums. THE RESULTS ARE GLARING! I would also invite you to read the DO above comment when he even adknowleged that he felt his education was "just as good as, or even better" than MDs. I even tutored MD students on NMSK disorders because my presentations are more in-dept.
I guess to answer the question, did I attend both MD and DO school, hmm..yes and no. We work,and learn hand and hand.
smile.gif


You know, I truly would like to agree with your remarks, because they sound so noble, just and politically correct. However, it does not reflect the real world. In reality, DO and MD curriculums are not alike, and it extends beyond OMM. IF, you attend a MD school you have it easier than I
smile.gif


Regards,
Angela

Originally posted by Mango:
I would assume that you have been a student at an MD and a DO school in order to make that statement, correct? But I would be wrong to assume that about you, wouldn't I? Sort of like how it is ridiculous for you to presume you know anything about the level of education that those of us in different schools are receiving. In your future posts, please try not to make such glaring accusations without any founding whatsoever.

Incidentally I would expect to receive the same response from some of my DO colleagues had I posted some crap about MD schools teaching renal phsysiology or neuro pathology more extensively than DO schools.

Oh, and I'd watch the new survivor, if I wasn't up till 4am every night this week studying for exams! Yeah, med school's fun!
biggrin.gif


[This message has been edited by Mango (edited 02-10-2001).]

 
Originally posted by turtleboard:


I mention this only because in a state that has only had one osteopathic institution in its history, has only one osteopathic medical school, and has way fewer than 3,000 DOs, it doesn't seem likely that any hospital "prefers" DOs -- unless I'm reading your statement totally incorrectly.

Tim W. of N.Y.C.


Point of Information for:

The Atlantic School of Osteopathy, est. in Wilkes-Barre, PA (1898) moved to BUFFALO, NY until 1905.

Umm, guess that makes TWO NY osteo. schools in NY's history.

 
Angela, It was not my intention to sound noble or PC, I was telling you what I believe. And that is that you cannot make assumptions about curriculums at different schools. Your experiences cannot be extrapolated over the entire nation!

One last thing. When I was taking college biochem, we spent a whole week (four lectures) on cellular signal transduction pathways (G proteins, IP3, Ca etc). However in med school, it was covered in HALF of one lecture. So which time did I learn and understand the processes better? Obviously it was in med school. My point is, if there is such a HUGE disparity between the education at your DO school X, and unnamed MD school Y, than I would expect to see a difference in USMLE board score on the pertinent sections. I say that only because It's the only objective assessment we have to rate the two educations side by side.

I don't doubt for one minute that different schools, be they MD or DO, place differing levels of emphasis on ceratin topics. My school for instance spends almost the entire first year taking biochem, where as some med schools cover it in a few weeks! Do I think that I learned it any better than they did? Probably not, I just learned it more slowly.

Oh and I guess I should be glad that I chose not to go to OUCOM! I can't imagine having to study any more than this!
smile.gif



[This message has been edited by Mango (edited 02-10-2001).]
 
I am amazed by the inability of several folks in this thread to write. Or to think logically.

The way that not only medicine, but science, advances is through studies. Not all are valid, but as a poster pointed out, that is precisely why we go to medical school... to think for ourselves. (Not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak -- to invalidate good studies because bad ones exist!)

When any generalization that puts one thing down over another is put forth, it generally represents a great insecurity on the part of the writer. To imply that all MDs are less educated than DOs is beyond ridiculous. But not even worth arguing.

Maybe we need to get our noses out of Robbins Path and into Tom Robbins' fantastic novels. But then again, at osteopathic schools, it's so terribly difficult that no time exists to be human. Too bad.
 
By your comment, you sound like a first year student. However, I have never, ever mention or eluded to that ANY of my posting was reflective across the nation. If I did, please attach it to your comment. If you ACTUALLY had read my comments, I cited what a couple of NY residency recuiter had told me. At that time, I was working in a MD school. I had made the comment in support of Rosebud who previously made a simular comment. I think she is wiser than I because she chose not to respond to her rebuttles.

Mango, you ask to PROVE the DOs school offer a more in-dept presention of...etc. And I have, so why are you so sore about it? Please disagree, but don't twist my comments around that it applies nationwide. Expecially when I have previously commented that it doesn't.

Its strange that you are mixing undergrade classes and Medical school classes together. It doesn't make for a good arguement. At any rate, Signal transductions is just a basic science topic. It was also a class that was shared MD & DO. DOs are not required to take the USLME exam. SO the answer is NO, I don't see your point. No exam score will show if one school give a more though presentations than another. Some schools doesn't even think standardize tests, of any kind, is relective of a persons knowledge.

My comments stands DO gets more in-debt presentations of Cardio, NMSK, etc because we take a large class loads per semester and we attend classes all year round. I will also put this disclaimer in to make you feel better: THIS IS NOT REFLECTIVE OF ALL MD/DO SCHOOLS, IT ONLY RELECTS THE SCHOOLS THAT I HAVE CHECKED-which is a dozen or so. You can agree or disagree...or even change my comments around (it getting contagious). But PLEASE, Move on! I imagine that you may view me as an oddity, but I really did like signal transduction. so I don't understand why you cannot embrace it and your obvious relief not to further continue with it. It is the basis for cancer biology research.

By the way, for the most part, all schools recieve the same amount of biochem. Perhaps, what you fail to see is that some schools "chop" biochem up or incorporate it in another class. One school, has a class called "biochem" and last for 8 weeks. Then for another 8 weeks they have a class called Nutrition. Nutition: is actually a biochem class. where they teach the different CHO, LIPID, FATS pathway. There are some colleges who chop biochem up in 13 weeks. the last 3 weeks are incorporated into a genetic class. Just to be fair, I am not your typical medical student. Perhaps asking you to look at curriculums was not a good idea. I believe it will confuse you more than anything else.

Good luck in Medical School, let move on from this.
Originally posted by Mango:
Angela, It was not my intention to sound noble or PC, I was telling you what I believe. And that is that you cannot make assumptions about curriculums at different schools. Your experiences cannot be extrapolated over the entire nation!

One last thing. When I was taking college biochem, we spent a whole week (four lectures) on cellular signal transduction pathways (G proteins, IP3, Ca etc). However in med school, it was covered in HALF of one lecture. So which time did I learn and understand the processes better? Obviously it was in med school. My point is, if there is such a HUGE disparity between the education at your DO school X, and unnamed MD school Y, than I would expect to see a difference in USMLE board score on the pertinent sections. I say that only because It's the only objective assessment we have to rate the two educations side by side.

I don't doubt for one minute that different schools, be they MD or DO, place differing levels of emphasis on ceratin topics. My school for instance spends almost the entire first year taking biochem, where as some med schools cover it in a few weeks! Do I think that I learned it any better than they did? Probably not, I just learned it more slowly.

Oh and I guess I should be glad that I chose not to go to OUCOM! I can't imagine having to study any more than this!
smile.gif



[This message has been edited by Mango (edited 02-10-2001).]

 
Now your comment takes home the OSCAR.
I cannot believe the number of people read into things or believe what they want.
What was your score in READING COMPENHENSION?
Your right, to imply that MDs are less educated than DOs is not worth auguing. Expecially when no one implyed it. Because one school give a more in-debt presentations than other does not mean that MD is less educated. No one even mentioned to invalate good studies because bad studies exist. I don't recall seeing the word 'invalate' in anyone's comments. You don't know anyone on this board, so please stop making all these strange pseudo-psychological profiles on people who comment on the board. If you disagree with a comment, feel free to do so but you know when you lost your arguement, is when you personally attack the person's with whom you disagree with.
Also, no one has the time to edit, proof writings and to be grammerically correct. Even you, I don't recall "Or to think logically." constitite a complete sentence: therefore, don't throw stones.

Incidently, I am attending medical school for a better understanding. As far as the THINKING part. You should been thinking for yourself long before you step foot into the admissions office. I consider medical school (part of the osteopathic principles)is to provide a bettering understanding of diseased or trama to cells/tissues and organs. How it relates to a persons well-being, to his family and his community as a whole. So I don't share in either analysis of the purpose of medical school is to make one think. What were you doing in undergrad? not thinking?? So you went to medical school to learn how to think? Tom Robbins?? I don't read 'pulp fiction' and no I don't have time to sit and read novels. But please enjoy yours.
smile.gif



Originally posted by PimplePopperMD:
I am amazed by the inability of several folks in this thread to write. Or to think logically.

The way that not only medicine, but science, advances is through studies. Not all are valid, but as a poster pointed out, that is precisely why we go to medical school... to think for ourselves. (Not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak -- to invalidate good studies because bad ones exist!)

When any generalization that puts one thing down over another is put forth, it generally represents a great insecurity on the part of the writer. To imply that all MDs are less educated than DOs is beyond ridiculous. But not even worth arguing.

Maybe we need to get our noses out of Robbins Path and into Tom Robbins' fantastic novels. But then again, at osteopathic schools, it's so terribly difficult that no time exists to be human. Too bad.


 
Personally, these ridiculous arguments seem only to divide the two professions. No large generalizations like "DO's get more..."MD's learn more..." arrive to any conclusion considering EVERY medical school teaches subjects in a different way and are on different schedules!
So who cares! If you want to be a DO or MD or DDS go for it...I imagine you have your own justifications.
What both sides should be working toward is the survival of our professions in a world that is constantly threatening not only patient care but reimbursement of our services!! (there are 10 topics located in that statement alone!)
There is mounting debt created by school loans and increasing malpractice rates once we graduate...ALL OF THESE ISSUES ARE FACED BY DO's and MD's ALIKE FOLLOWING GRADUATION.
So stop the nonsence bickering and discuss the issues that TRULY effect medicine today!!!!!!


eMS3
 
sorry this is a bit of subject:
is anyone else concerned that the
Nova vs. COMP thread was suddenly pulled without any explanation?

while i agree that the two individuals engaging in personal attacks were acting unprofessionally and in fact one, a premed student was actually attempting to diagnose me with a medical condition (this is a third degree felony in florida) simply because he disagreed with my views. Still, i am a big boy, i can take their slander, while i appreciate the forum censors from stopping this personal attack, i feel the overall message of the thread: ie look at all schools from both a positive and negative side is suffering more than the two individuals whose lack of professional ethic must have precipitated the censorship.
one might think the forum leaders were trying to censor all negative commentary when i am CERTAIN they would never attempt that and are ONLY punishing the little children who were misbehaving. but the message isnt clear since there was no explanation.
 
by the way, if any Nova first years have question regarding cardio physiology, feel free to email me at [email protected], i am on nights for the next two weeks so will be able to answer questions while waiting on the inevitable beeper to sound telling me somewhere there is a patient with a headache or who cant sleep.
talk to susan lee, taraskevitch or dribin if you feel uncomfortable about asking me for help, i wont charge for it, its kind of fun to teach this stuff particularly when its so often presented in what seems to be a confusing manner.

one tip: to learn the wigger diagram, realize it is not a graph, it is six or seven different graphs each of which have their own unique y axis and when learned separately are common sense.
 
Thanks for explaining the obvious regarding the wigger diagram...I would have never seen that it is actually more than one graph.. Your the BEST shoe!!!
 
while you got that josh, if you talk to some of your fellow classmates with a less overwhelming ability to see such obvious things you will find they often miss the fact that the y axis changes from pressure to volume to amplitude. if you are intellectually honest you will inquire around and see these statements are true, if you are not, that will make itself evident by your comments as it may have already.
 
Originally posted by Angelado40:
You have made over 80 responses with in the past few months which leads me to believe that you spent a lot of time trying to pick pointless auguements with people over the internet.

Your right, Angela, I have posted quite a few posts on this forum since I made the decision to apply to medical school. Up until now, they have all been informative discussions and not arguments. You are the one in medical school yet you have made 4 posts since my last post and all of them have been disagreements with other people.

I chose not to return insultive comments toward you. I chose to remain mature.

Oh, please. Look at your previous posts! They are filled with insulting comments and undertones as have been your posts to other people.

What led to these so-called "crutial advancements" in medicine was not done by studies, it was done through non-bias EXPERIMENTATION & RESEARCH. Every company preform studies--rather its comparing soft-drinks or toliet paper. Studies are a dime a dozen. Perhaps you need to distinguish between the two.

Perhaps you need to get a grip. Experimentation and research projects are performed in labortories and precede clinical studies. Clinical trials and studies are then performed with a patient population. Please, talk to your professors if you think I am wrong. You are so missing the boat on this one.

My misguided friend, your logic is so incredibly twisted and out in left-field that it makes it impossible to have an intelligent discussion with you. I am embarrassed by the fact that I have resorted to insults, however, it has only been in response to your insultive tones which have proven to be a common theme in most of your posts.

Incidentally, I find it absolutely amazing that MSU-COM accepted someone into their program who has such atrocious spelling and grammar skills. I realize that English is probably not your first language, however, may I recommend you hire a tutor to help you in this regard?
biggrin.gif


 
Originally posted by Angelado40:
I don't recall seeing the word 'invalate' in anyone's comments.
...Also, no one has the time to edit, proof writings and to be grammerically correct.
...Tom Robbins?? I don't read 'pulp fiction' and no I don't have time to sit and read novels.

No, you didn't see the word "invalate" anywhere. And I suppose that we need not be "grammerically" correct in discussing issues. Finally, Tom Robbins *DIDN'T* write "Pulp Fiction", and it's a crying shame if you don't find time to pick up a book.

My issue is simply that DOs and MDs are the same once they become residents. It's people like you who insist that these HUGE differences exist in their educations. In fact, there is really no huge difference across all schools -- one can pick schools out of a hat, and find differences, both between MD schools AND between MD & DO schools.

Now, please continue on being "grammerically" correct or incorrect. Whatever. I'm going back to Camus! Now *there's* a writer!

Cheers!
 
I just want to say after reading all of these posts that you guys have missed something that is blatently apparent, at least in my opinion.

I don't believe this Angela person is well. In fact, I'm not even sure she is a medical student at all. Her responses seem to imply deepseated issues of insecurity and flight of ideas.

Lets all cut her some slack. After all, we are all health care providers who have been trained to care for those who are afflicted. Let's not forget that.
 
Now that the smoke has cleared...all that is left is unfounded personal slanderous attacks against me and not at the topic on hand. There is nothing to add. Except that I can add onto everyones comments like you did mine, but I would not be no better than you. Only one question sticks into my brain: "what the hell was you guys reading comprehenion scores????

Good luck in applying to medical school, I have noticed that no DO student disagreed with me. Just a lot of sour grape comments from allopathic students who really doesn't truly know anything about osteopathic medicine.

Elvis has left the stage. This topic is getting old. Although I love the posters who make several paragraph comments detailing how these topics are not worth about. Have you guys ever heard of just NOT writing on something not worthy of comment on? Novel idea, huh?
THIS ISSUE IS NOW CLOSED---PLEASE MOVE ON AND STOP MAKING ME THE MOST IMPORTANT WRITER IN THIS ROOM.

I would bet anyone $50 that someone is still going to write a YET another comment about me. Its in your nature to do so. So I will check at the end of the month to see which one's ego I brused the most.
 
The KEY word is "preference". It appears that Angela failed to fully explain why a study will not be feasiable in this case because preference studies are the most bias. Unfortunately, people do conduct businesses in a "preferred manner"-even their hiring practices. Its merits or fairness is another issue. One example, my friend's wife is the head nurse of a local hospital. She prefers to hire graduates from one community college over another. Fair? probably not, but its the "way of the beast". I have no doubt that it can occur on a internship/residency level as well.
Obviously, Angela was given confidential information about certian NY hospitals hiring practices. Sometimes confidential information should remain confidential. If you know what I mean Angela. She is on target that portions of 1st year science classes sometimes are incorporated with other classes.
Even though a number of you have insisted that Angela felt DO were superior to MD or everything is reflective on a nationwide basis, I did not read anything that eludes to these findings. She stated something about DO recieve more in-debt presentations and attend classes all year round. Because one group is exposed to more lectures and classes doesn't lead to a conclusion that group is superior over the other. Or the other group is dumber because of it. Can we honestly say that one group has more exposure on a given topic than the other?

Her comments are indeed interesting.
 
Originally posted by deathkiss:
She stated something about DO recieve more in-debt presentations and attend classes all year round. Because one group is exposed to more lectures and classes doesn't lead to a conclusion that group is superior over the other. Or the other group is dumber because of it. Can we honestly say that one group has more exposure on a given topic than the other?

Her comments are indeed interesting.

I couldn't agree more. In fact, I certainly wouldn't want an in-debt exposure to any science. I am already in debt enough. Call me old-fashioned, but I'd prefer an in-depth review of science.

And *your* preference issue is indeed interesting, because it is absolutely valid. Many residencies prefer MDs, but will take exceptional DOs (simply because they aren't familiar with DOs, or graduates from your particular school).

That's the crux of the matter. The rest of this nonsense is purely for entertainment purposes, but certainly should not be seen by children, as they may assume that all future physicians have an expressive aphasia.

Angela, I wish you all the best. Might I suggest some relaxation techniques?

Cheers!
 
I wonder if Rolltide really goes to Nova or if he's going to the utopia version he has envisioned in his head?? Not to say that Nova is not a good school. It is for the most part. However, like all med schools, it has its good and bad points.
 
Yep, he actually goes there...wanna know his grades? just kidding i would never reveal that information.
his problem is a typical one, many people feel the need to completely immerse themselves blindly into a school without diving in eyes open...think about his nickname...blind devotion without honest desire for truth is the keynote philosophy here....Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon etc...build their entire empires around such people...they make excellent beaurocrats doomed by the peter priniciple to middle management....their blindness doesnt necessitate they become poor physicians, but it certainly makes it easier to pervert them once ethical issues arise. They most often will do what they are told regardless if it is right...that is their entire credo...faith in a system without openly exploring the system....hopefully he'll become a marine physician, perfect fit...or an HMO one, his patients might suffer, but they are the ones choosing the cheap way out and they will get what they pay for every time. word up.


 
I have never seen so many people offended my remarks made on line before. Pimplepopper, MD Using personal remarks only dilutes your arguement into something not worthwhile reading.


Originally posted by PimplePopperMD:
I couldn't agree more. In fact, I certainly wouldn't want an in-debt exposure to any science. I am already in debt enough. Call me old-fashioned, but I'd prefer an in-depth review of science.

And *your* preference issue is indeed interesting, because it is absolutely valid. Many residencies prefer MDs, but will take exceptional DOs (simply because they aren't familiar with DOs, or graduates from your particular school).

That's the crux of the matter. The rest of this nonsense is purely for entertainment purposes, but certainly should not be seen by children, as they may assume that all future physicians have an expressive aphasia.

Angela, I wish you all the best. Might I suggest some relaxation techniques?

Cheers!

 
Incidently, the statement, "I don't read pulp fiction" is not reference to the book, "Pulp Fiction". It implies that someone doesn't read pulp fiction novels. They are "easy-read" novels usually dealing with predictable sensational material. Do you really have the time to read novels and keep up with your the medical school coursework? Or, should I have first ask are you in medical school?

Originally posted by PimplePopperMD:
No, you didn't see the word "invalate" anywhere. And I suppose that we need not be "grammerically" correct in discussing issues. Finally, Tom Robbins *DIDN'T* write "Pulp Fiction", and it's a crying shame if you don't find time to pick up a book.

My issue is simply that DOs and MDs are the same once they become residents. It's people like you who insist that these HUGE differences exist in their educations. In fact, there is really no huge difference across all schools -- one can pick schools out of a hat, and find differences, both between MD schools AND between MD & DO schools.

Now, please continue on being "grammerically" correct or incorrect. Whatever. I'm going back to Camus! Now *there's* a writer!

Cheers!

 
I was initially drawn to this line because I applied to both DO and MD, and had to make the decision, like many people here. I *am* a medical student, but I am *also* a human being, which means that I refuse to give my life entirely to medicine. I do have classmates who do just that, but without an outside life, even if it includes reading novels, your well-rounded personality becomes flat really quickly.

My feelings on the issue at hand, however, for those who are interested, and for those who are faced with the same decision:

If *YOU* are lucky enough to have the choice, both MD and DO are essentially equal degrees, but public perception as well as legal perception is different. Certainly internationally, the DO is regarded differently (like a DC) in MANY countries. Further, the opportunities for specialization are less on the DO path (though they absolutely exist). The "philosophy" doesn't much matter in Path class. It doesn't much matter in surgery rotation. So go based on what will get you to where you want to be. For me, it was MD.

And it seems by all the posters here that it's significantly easier, since I have time to have a life.
smile.gif


Cheers!
 
PimplepooperMD
I am trying to objectively look into DO and MD schools. Personally, I am not seeking public acceptance. Your comment of how DO and MD are viewed is quite confusing. What do you mean by a differing legal perception?
What supportive documentation can you offer me about differing legal perceptions of DO and MDs. How can the "legal eagles" (not the novel-its a phrase)prove this disparity?

According to the previous postings, in one school, I think its MSUCOM, DOs attend the same classes as MDs. In some cases, they must attend more classes.(this is true, I checked on the internet). The education level of Dos in the science of medicine (including your pathology example) is exceptional. Using your surgical rotation, etc. example, why wouldn't the "philosophy" apply to surgical patients? Don't you actually treat the whole person and not my gall-bladder? I am not a medical student, but I am a *human-being*. I would like my doctor to recognize me as a person. Personally, I don't want to be viewed as the gall-bladder case. I want my doctor to recognize my family.
You are quite right, it is about the issues on hand.
I am quite sure that you are a well-rounded person, as with everyone who post here. I wrongfully assume that since reading novels is timeconsuming, it will be difficult keep up with your coursework. It seems that you have found a outlet that suits yourself.

If you decide to respond, I would appreciate only objective comments on the issues.
 
Top