Is there really a difference between MD and DO?

[GrapesofRath]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I agree with all but it's going a bit too far to dismiss people who retook a bad MCAT score to a very high MCAT as high-risk applicants because a standardized measure isn't available. Step 1 and the boards are obviously on a different level and much harder but using the MCAT as a proxy when it tests different things is a bit off-target



Step 1 is a one-shot deal because school time is invested into preparing for the exam. Failing Step 1 and having to retake it reduces clinical time which is a death sentence to the residency app. There is no such pressure involved in the MCAT, hence why the exam isn't a one-shot deal. No one is investing resources into your doing well on the MCAT besides you, whereas the medical school is making sure you succeed on Step 1 and on the boards or else they will make you pay severely

The reason Step 1 is a one shot deal is because that's the way medicine and the professional world is. You get one shot. No re-dos. That's the standard by which you are judged. Nobody craves for medical students who can succeed after failing or not achieving a standard. That's just not good enough in that field.

The timing issue about Step 1 isn't the key in terms of why you can only take it once, just as there is no other part of med school you are magically allowed to re-do if you don't get the score you want unless you fail. The school investing time in you isn't the reason behind Step 1 being a one shot deal. Everything counts at that level, and you get one shot to do it the way you need to.

 

[GrapesofRath]

@Lawper at that point you can look at the effect of competition. Why look at the guy with a 26 and then a 35 when you can take the guy with a first-time 34 instead? There are plenty of those to go around.

Also although the MCAT is used as a proxy for standardized test taking ability along with a small to medium amount of content mastery, the fact that MCAT retakers can be highly successful in admissions means that not nearly as much emphasis is placed on it as step 1 anyway. So it is a proxy, but it's not a perfect analogue (which I think is obvious to everyone, as well as not the intended purpose of the test) and adcoms know this.

Going back to the original point (or at least one more upstream), this is why complaining about how much the MCAT can change your chances for med school admissions is pointless when you're entering a profession where each successive step is going to be even more high stakes.

This whole discussion definitely plays some role in a) why there are ADCOMs who aren't fans of re-taking MCAT scores that are sufficient as is. b) why so many schools will average multiple MCAT scores c) why as gyngyn said he knows just as many individual evaluators who put more weight in the poorer score as those who put more weight in the higher score for applicants with more than one MCAT score.

As a side note it's worth noting there are also a fair number of RD's and others at the type of level and ranking who will still tell you they wish that Step 1 was merely a pass/fail exam like its original intention was and don't support how Step 1 is used in residency admission purposes.

 

[Lawpy]

@Lawper at that point you can look at the effect of competition. Why look at the guy with a 26 and then a 35 when you can take the guy with a first-time 34 instead? There are plenty of those to go around.

Also although the MCAT is used as a proxy for standardized test taking ability along with a small to medium amount of content mastery, the fact that MCAT retakers can be highly successful in admissions means that not nearly as much emphasis is placed on it as step 1 anyway. So it is a proxy, but it's not a perfect analogue (which I think is obvious to everyone, as well as not the intended purpose of the test) and adcoms know this.

Going back to the original point (or at least one more upstream), this is why complaining about how much the MCAT can change your chances for med school admissions is pointless when you're entering a profession where each successive step is going to be even more high stakes.

It's important to note that the guy who went from a 26 to a 35 actually got a 35. Is it as good as a 35 by itself? Clearly not, but it's situational. Adcoms clearly aren't one-dimensional to blindly choose a 34 guy just because of one attempt, since otherwise:

1. Retakers wouldn't get into medical school in the first place
2. AAMC would enforce a one-shot MCAT deal (and no school/adcom would have a retake policy)

MCAT is used as a proxy for Step 1/boards analysis only because of its standardized nature, which we can agree. And yes, each step gets harder than the last, but at least there is a consistent motivation and support system along the way, unlike the ambiguity surrounding the MCAT.

This whole discussion definitely plays some role in a) why there are ADCOMs who aren't fans of re-taking MCAT scores that are sufficient as is. b) why so many schools will average multiple MCAT scores c) why as gyngyn said he knows just as many individual evaluators who put more weight in the poorer score as those who put more weight in the higher score for applicants with more than one MCAT score.

As a side note it's worth noting there are also a fair number of RD's and others at the type of level and ranking who will still tell you they wish that Step 1 was merely a pass/fail exam like its original intention was and don't support how Step 1 is used in residency admission purposes.

Adcoms can play all the numbers games and do a bunch of advanced statistical analyses for all I care, since they also arbitrarily assign random weights to ECs and do some calculations. The admissions process is chaotic and so sensitive to errors, human biases, connections, impressions etc. This is why forecasting the admissions even for the best applicants is a fool's errands. And what each adcom say is best used as a guide

I consistently agree that taking the MCAT once and doing it well is essential. I also agree that retaking a good score is discouraged due to increased risk of doing the same or worse in the second attempt. What is going too far is in the small cases is the random stigma against people who do retake good scores and score even higher. Of course, adcoms can intellectualize all they want since it's their call, but the results of these cases say otherwise.

The reason Step 1 is a one shot deal is because that's the way medicine and the professional world is. You get one shot. No re-dos. That's the standard by which you are judged. Nobody craves for medical students who can succeed after failing or not achieving a standard. That's just not good enough in that field.

The timing issue about Step 1 isn't the key in terms of why you can only take it once, just as there is no other part of med school you are magically allowed to re-do if you don't get the score you want unless you fail. The school investing time in you isn't the reason behind Step 1 being a one shot deal. Everything counts at that level, and you get one shot to do it the way you need to.

And that schools are literally investing time and resources for Step 1 prep. Why are you ignoring that factor? Retaking Step 1 means that schools waste even more time and resources to make sure you do well and not look bad.

There is no reason for MCAT to be a one-shot deal because no one is investing resources into your doing well. No one cares. Only you do.

 

[WedgeDawg]

@Lawper I think I've lost track of what we're actually discussing. What are we arguing about (I mean this sincerely)?

 

[Lawpy]

@Lawper I think I've lost track of what we're actually discussing. What are we arguing about (I mean this sincerely)?

Honestly I don't even know. Basically:

1. I don't think people who retook the MCAT and improved by several points are in a disadvantage as it's made out to be on SDN. The trends in the SSD forums say otherwise.

2. The MCAT and Step 1/boards test very different things under very different scenarios, even though it is obvious that Step 1/boards is a lot harder than the MCAT (smarter test takers, support etc.)

 

[WedgeDawg]

Honestly I don't even know. Basically:

1. I don't think people who retook the MCAT and improved by several points are in a disadvantage as it's made out to be on SDN. The trends in the SSD forums say otherwise.

2. The MCAT and Step 1/boards test very different things under very different scenarios, even though it is obvious that Step 1/boards is a lot harder than the MCAT (smarter test takers, support etc.)

Okay. Thanks for the recap. I'll be back in a bit to continue this and elaborate on my original point where I think we diverged.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Honestly I don't even know. Basically:

1. I don't think people who retook the MCAT and improved by several points are in a disadvantage as it's made out to be on SDN. The trends in the SSD forums say otherwise.

2. The MCAT and Step 1/boards test very different things under very different scenarios, even though it is obvious that Step 1/boards is a lot harder than the MCAT (smarter test takers, support etc.)

Okay, so my original point was that we shouldn't be complaining about the fact that the MCAT has a pretty deterministic effect on your future in medicine (as in it could be the reason you don't become a doctor) in response to a previous post (I think by Gandyy?), particularly when things in the future are more high-stakes and there are ways around a poor MCAT score (as you've demonstrated very well in your last couple of posts). The second point above I don't think actually matters too much when discussing the original point (and you're right, they're different beasts). My argument was that because you can 1) retake the MCAT without too many repercussions or 2) go DO with a lower score as well as 3) the fact that the MCAT is one of the lower-stakes-but-still-important things you'll do in your medical career, we shouldn't really complain about it, because it just gets a lot more intense from there on out.

So I think we are in agreement lol, but we're just trying to prove different things.

 

[Lawpy]

Okay, so my original point was that we shouldn't be complaining about the fact that the MCAT has a pretty deterministic effect on your future in medicine (as in it could be the reason you don't become a doctor) in response to a previous post (I think by Gandyy?), particularly when things in the future are more high-stakes and there are ways around a poor MCAT score (as you've demonstrated very well in your last couple of posts). The second point above I don't think actually matters too much when discussing the original point (and you're right, they're different beasts). My argument was that because you can 1) retake the MCAT without too many repercussions or 2) go DO with a lower score as well as 3) the fact that the MCAT is one of the lower-stakes-but-still-important things you'll do in your medical career, we shouldn't really complain about it, because it just gets a lot more intense from there on out.

So I think we are in agreement lol, but we're just trying to prove different things.

Yeah i agree with you. Well put.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

It actually doesn't do much good for me to say that student who'd never written an inpatient OB note was from _COM. I'm sure she had classmates who had very different experiences with different preceptors. From an MD faculty point of view it's that variability that's an issue. Although if there are schools that wards-only clinical years, that would be helpful for me to know.

Sorry I don't get this preceptor business. Do you mind elaborating?

 

[WedgeDawg]

Sorry I don't get this preceptor business. Do you mind elaborating?

Some (many?) DO schools for clinical rotations will send you out to private practice outpatient clinics and basically have you follow the attending ("preceptor") around. All MD schools and a few DO schools will have you be a (bottom) part of the healthcare team on the wards (i.e. inpatient hospital services) alongside residents, fellows, and attendings. The inherent variability in the quality of these private practice outpatient rotations is what worries PDs and those on residency selection committees about the quality of clinical training at DO schools, which are by and large less regulated than the clinical experiences at MD schools.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Some (many?) DO schools for clinical rotations will send you out to private practice outpatient clinics and basically have you follow the attending ("preceptor") around. All MD schools and a few DO schools will have you be a (bottom) part of the healthcare team on the wards (i.e. inpatient hospital services) alongside residents, fellows, and attendings. The inherent variability in the quality of these private practice outpatient rotations is what worries PDs and those on residency selection committees about the quality of clinical training at DO schools, which are by and large less regulated than the clinical experiences at MD schools.

Thanks homie!! I googled preceptor and it seemed more like glorified shadowing so I can totally see why that would worry PDs...

 

[Goro]

The people running the AOA are doctors, NOT medical educators. And many of them came of age when the mindset of allopathic medical education and the practice of Medicine was ""DO = bad". So it gives them a chip on the shoulder to prove "we're unique".

It also oesn't help that a good number of them drank very deeply from the cult of Still (something that would have appalled AT Still.)

1. Why does the AOA feel that way? In other words, what possible features does the AOA believe make DO schools unique and essential that having more DO grads is necessary?

Well, COMLEX assessed osteopathic education, which doesn't merely include OMT but also OPP
2. Why is the need of COMLEX important in preclinical education when USMLE suffices?

Well, at the least, the residency process is becoming a single entity. Apps could be done by a single system.
It's interesting to know more about the DO structure but i just have this feeling that the two degrees are essentially equivalent that there is no point in having a separate application process and standardized exams

 

[WedgeDawg]

Thanks homie!! I googled preceptor and it seemed more like glorified shadowing so I can totally see why that would worry PDs...

Preceptor doesn't necessarily have a negative connotation. I'm pretty sure you can still call your attendings at your university hospital your preceptors too, it's just that they're trained to teach and these PP folks are often not.

 

[AlteredScale]

Some (many?) DO schools for clinical rotations will send you out to private practice outpatient clinics and basically have you follow the attending ("preceptor") around. All MD schools and a few DO schools will have you be a (bottom) part of the healthcare team on the wards (i.e. inpatient hospital services) alongside residents, fellows, and attendings. The inherent variability in the quality of these private practice outpatient rotations is what worries PDs and those on residency selection committees about the quality of clinical training at DO schools, which are by and large less regulated than the clinical experiences at MD schools.

Very very true. And thus, I think anyone in the DO pathway has a role and duty to be upfront and honest about the facts regarding what sorts of doors you may be closing by choosing such and the REAL reason as to why this occurs. Obviously I would like it to change but being on the inside it's obvious that the best interest of the AOA and COCA is far beyond student success and using the facade of "direct hands on, first assist, clinical exposure" via preceptor based, non-regulated, non GME, community hospital sites is an easy way to scheme prospective applicants into thinking it will help them in the long run.

Some DO school are doing it right, others are taking advantage of the system.

 

[22031 Alum]

I'm pretty sure you can still call your attendings at your university hospital your preceptors too,

It may vary by school. At Vandy the term "preceptor" was reserved for a shadowing experience we did first and second years. Once you hit the clinical years you would say "My attending."

 

[WingedOx]

It may vary by school. At Vandy the term "preceptor" was reserved for a shadowing experience we did first and second years. Once you hit the clinical years you would say "My attending."

I simply referred to them as "provider".

/quietly sneaks out of thread and finds a seat with a view.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Very very true. And thus, I think anyone in the DO pathway has a role and duty to be upfront and honest about the facts regarding what sorts of doors you may be closing by choosing such and the REAL reason as to why this occurs. Obviously I would like it to change but being on the inside it's obvious that the best interest of the AOA and COCA is far beyond student success and using the facade of "direct hands on, first assist, clinical exposure" via preceptor based, non-regulated, non GME, community hospital sites is an easy way to scheme prospective applicants into thinking it will help them in the long run.

Some DO school are doing it right, others are taking advantage of the system.

As you've pointed out several times, the DO programs should theoretically mirror the MD programs in terms of clinical education. Hopefully this gap closes sometime in the near future...

 

[Oh_Gee]

so is 1 of the 2 ways better?

1. preceptor teaching you

or

2. working in a team with residents and attendings/preceptors

or in other words, what would the best clinical rotation experience look like?

 

[WedgeDawg]

so is 1 of the 2 ways better?

1. preceptor teaching you

or

2. working in a team with residents and attendings/preceptors

or in other words, what would the best clinical rotation experience look like?

Pretty sure #2 is universally regarded to be better.

nvm see other's more informed responses below

 

[Psai]

Pretty sure #2 is universally regarded to be better.

I actually prefer 1 but it depends on the preceptor

 

[WedgeDawg]

Disclaimer: I'm preclinical currently so I'm just going off of what I've heard and have no actual experience with which is better (I'm personally just a learning by doing vs. learning by listening/observing person) so take what I say with a grain of salt

 

[22031 Alum]

so is 1 of the 2 ways better?

1. preceptor teaching you

or

2. working in a team with residents and attendings/preceptors

or in other words, what would the best clinical rotation experience look like?

I think 1 can be good, if done well, but I don't think it should be the entirety of the clinical experience. I teach residents, and that is a monumental enough task WITHOUT having those who've had little exposure to a resident's day-to-day.

 

[AlteredScale]

As you've pointed out several times, the DO programs should theoretically mirror the MD programs in terms of clinical education. Hopefully this gap closes sometime in the near future...

I think a good first step is to essentially start doing a better job creating clinical faculty/leadership that will oversee where 3rd year and 4th year students are going and to actually create regulations in clerkship exposure (only at places with GME with dedicated clinical faculty to the school) and the assist DO schools who are not on this level. It seems like every DO school is left to fend for themselves when it comes to this aspect specifically.

 

[Lawpy]

The people running the AOA are doctors, NOT medical educators. And many of them came of age when the mindset of allopathic medical education and the practice of Medicine was ""DO = bad". So it gives them a chip on the shoulder to prove "we're unique".

It also oesn't help that a good number of them drank very deeply from the cult of Still (something that would have appalled AT Still.)

1. Why does the AOA feel that way? In other words, what possible features does the AOA believe make DO schools unique and essential that having more DO grads is necessary?

Well, COMLEX assessed osteopathic education, which doesn't merely include OMT but also OPP
2. Why is the need of COMLEX important in preclinical education when USMLE suffices?

Well, at the least, the residency process is becoming a single entity. Apps could be done by a single system.
It's interesting to know more about the DO structure but i just have this feeling that the two degrees are essentially equivalent that there is no point in having a separate application process and standardized exams

Great thanks for your feedback Goro! I'm sad to hear about #1 but I suppose time heals all wounds (hopefully soon ). I still feel OMM and related concepts can be bridged together as an elective or a course for MD curricula because there are very useful benefits in practice.

But while for now DO and MD apps are different, it would most certainly help for Texas schools to follow an AMCAS-type route.

Oh wait... it's Texas... My bad.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Honestly I think a little of both can do a student some good. It is important to see what happens outside of the academic medical world seeing as most docs practice in the community, but it is also imperative to learn how to be an intern who can at least find his way around, which is what residencies want. And that requires spending time on a team. In my humble non educated opinion I would say that maybe one preceptor based rotation would be good with the rest being ward based. It also probably depends on the specialty, it is probably more important to do rotations such as surgery and medicine on a resident team than it is to do FP for example.

Disclaimer: I defer to those with more knowledge than I as I am just sharing my opinions and have no experience with this matter outside of seeing and talking to many students (DO/MD) do preceptorships at the hospital I work at

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

This thread should be stickied. It has provided us with some very honest answers about the differences between the MD and DO tracks.

 

[22031 Alum]

In my humble non educated opinion I would say that maybe one preceptor based rotation would be good with the rest being ward based. It also probably depends on the specialty, it is probably more important to do rotations such as surgery and medicine on a resident team than it is to do FP for example.

In my humble opinion it'd be better to have every rotation be a mix. For example, my Medicine rotation included stints on three different inpatient teams, followed by a clinics experience. I chose to work with an attending who'd been in charge of one of my inpatient teams. It was great. He already knew me, knew what I'd seen and done on the inpatient side, and did a great job of helping me understand the difference between inpatient and outpatient Medicine.

My current students get assigned an attending to follow in clinic, one-on-one, once a week for the six-week rotation. That always gets positive reviews as well.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

In my humble opinion it'd be better to have every rotation be a mix. For example, my Medicine rotation included stints on three different inpatient teams, followed by a clinics experience. I chose to work with an attending who'd been in charge of one of my inpatient teams. It was great. He already knew me, knew what I'd seen and done on the inpatient side, and did a great job of helping me understand the difference between inpatient and outpatient Medicine.

My current students get assigned an attending to follow in clinic, one-on-one, once a week for the six-week rotation. That always gets positive reviews as well.

Be warned... sensible ideas do not belong on SDN.😉




But in all seriousness this would be the ideal situation. Like you say, there are great benefits to both when they are done right. A combination would provide real PP experience while also teaching how to work with residents and be an intern, which would be a very well rounded education. It also allows for close relationships between attendings and students, which, from my understanding, do not happen all terribly often.

 

[Gandyy]

The worst thing about DO schools (as many of you have mentioned) is that apparently its ok to ship off students to very poor clinical rotations. I do not think the "worse academic caliber" student factor is nearly as big of a factor as the poor rotations.

You dont learn medicine by going through books alone. Just like anything else, you need real hands on practice. Anyone who is forced to go DO if they still want to be a physician is hurting on this aspect, and I dont think AOA is going to be changing it very soon.

 

[WedgeDawg]

The worst thing about DO schools (as many of you have mentioned) is that apparently its ok to ship off students to very poor clinical rotations. I do not think the "worse academic caliber" student factor is nearly as big of a factor as the poor rotations.

You dont learn medicine by going through books alone. Just like anything else, you need real hands on practice. Anyone who is forced to go DO if they still want to be a physician is hurting on this aspect, and I dont think AOA is going to be changing it very soon.

Initial conditions are still important

 

[jl lin]

The worst thing about DO schools (as many of you have mentioned) is that apparently its ok to ship off students to very poor clinical rotations. I do not think the "worse academic caliber" student factor is nearly as big of a factor as the poor rotations.

You dont learn medicine by going through books alone. Just like anything else, you need real hands on practice. Anyone who is forced to go DO if they still want to be a physician is hurting on this aspect, and I dont think AOA is going to be changing it very soon.

Well, this is disappointing to hear. Still the bulk of real application is in the continued, day-in/out clinical you get after graduation--in residency.
I earnestly hope DO programs that are weak in this regard will find ways to strengthen student exposure to excellent clinical rotations. It is indeed sad to think you are spending so much money to be exposed to subpar clinical rotations. Very disappointing.

 

[Tommyguns89]

.

 

[ZedsDed]

I do wonder how many people would chose not to go to med school at all over going to a DO school. I know one guy in particular who didn't have MD-worthy stats yet refused to apply DO because the "shame" would be too great.

 

[WingedOx]

I do wonder how many people would chose not to go to med school at all over going to a DO school. I know one guy in particular who didn't have MD-worthy stats yet refused to apply DO because the "shame" would be too great.

well you see plenty of people choose instead to get their medical education in the same small island countries where white collar criminals stash their bank accounts, and with governments so corrupt they would make the Chicago city council shake their heads.

 

[Lawpy]

The worst thing about DO schools (as many of you have mentioned) is that apparently its ok to ship off students to very poor clinical rotations. I do not think the "worse academic caliber" student factor is nearly as big of a factor as the poor rotations.

You dont learn medicine by going through books alone. Just like anything else, you need real hands on practice. Anyone who is forced to go DO if they still want to be a physician is hurting on this aspect, and I dont think AOA is going to be changing it very soon.

The AOA should stop being stubborn and greedy, and change its ways for the better.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

It's more COCA then it is the AOA. They are the DO equivalent of LCME while AOA is more like ACGME

 

[Psai]

I do wonder how many people would chose not to go to med school at all over going to a DO school. I know one guy in particular who didn't have MD-worthy stats yet refused to apply DO because the "shame" would be too great.

There's no shame in being a do. You're a doctor

 

[ZedsDed]

There's no shame in being a do. You're a doctor

I absolutely agree, but I have prestige-obsessed peers who don't.

 

[GrapesofRath]

I absolutely agree, but I have prestige-obsessed peers who don't.

SMP's wouldn't exist if there weren't hoards of people just like your peers you are talking about. Even intelligent rational people I've talked who are your generic 3.5/32 borderline applicants have started throwing the idea of "PA" or "Dental School" around if they don't get into MD schools before pursuing the DO route. I remember reading something a while back how there is an adviser at Princeton who has tried for so long to do all he can to get all the people from Princeton to get shut out from MD's to consider the DO route and has basically just given up because of how many people stubbornly oppose it.

It's fascinating really, and while what MeatTornado and all the other residents are saying here are valid about the limitations of a DO, you have to remember who these people are. These are some very high end MD graduates. Their peers and where they applied to aren't going to be DO's in most cases and the types of programs they looked into are exactly the type to discriminate against DO's. Many many quality programs, even if they aren't that kind of tier or close to it that these residents are at, are viable options for DO's. Many fields be it anasthesiology, pathology, EM, neurology etc are viable fields for DO's. The idea the generic pre-med will tort that DO's can usually only do primary care or have to work in community hospitals that are rather limited in what they can do is shall we say not very informed.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I absolutely agree, but I have prestige-obsessed peers who don't.

It's pretty funny because at my undergrad I have met a grand total of 10 people who will admit that they are going to apply DO and will consider it if they don't get into an MD. Most pre-meds here openly poo on the idea of going DO.... And then the cycle ends and every year we are one of the top feeder schools to osteopathic institutions... Go figure

 

[GrapesofRath]

It's pretty funny because at my undergrad I have met a grand total of 10 people who will admit that they are going to apply DO and will consider it if they don't get into an MD. Most pre-meds here openly poo on the idea of going DO.... And then the cycle ends and every year we are one of the top feeder schools to osteopathic institutions... Go figure

This actually reminds me of a conversation I once had with an adviser who's been doing this for 30 years. I remember asking him about why people can be so opposed to the DO route to the point they don't want to do medicine or would go through multiple MD app cycles before even considering a DO. His answer was simple
"Whether it's accurate or not. Fair or not. From my experience people simply don't feel like they accomplished that much by getting into a DO school. There's too much of a feeling that 'oh anybody could do it. Just re-take the classes you screwed up, don't bomb the MCAT, and just like that you are in'. For many 22 and 23 year olds a big part of the intrigue of medicine before they actually start it is the prestige behind it, and making the cut, being part of the select few, and what not. The DO route takes that away from them in their mind; they don't feel like they accomplished anything that anybody else couldn't do".

Obviously it's all subjective and there are laughable flaws with the above logic. But this was a person who's had hundreds upon hundreds of these conversations with pre-meds about the DO route and this was the first thing that came to his mind and really what stuck with him thinking about the question. It was just something that stuck in my mind and kind of intrigued me.

 

[WedgeDawg]

SMP's wouldn't exist if there weren't hoards of people just like your peers you are talking about.

I don't think that's entirely true. I understand your sentiment, but I personally believe that there are perfectly logical reasons that someone might not want to go DO, including wanting to go into a highly competitive specialty, wanting to go into research, wanting to go into academic medicine, etc. Some people may say prestige is a factor for them, and while I don't think it's an entirely logical reason, it's a valid one. Why force someone into something they don't want to do? If they want to go MD or do something else rather than go DO for prestige reasons, that's on them, silly as many of us might think it is, and they just won't get to be a doctor.

This is not to take away from your point that the vast majority of premeds are greatly misinformed about DOs; rather, it aims to present reasons why someone might make this choice.

 

[GrapesofRath]

I don't think that's entirely true. I understand your sentiment, but I personally believe that there are perfectly logical reasons that someone might not want to go DO, including wanting to go into a highly competitive specialty, wanting to go into research, wanting to go into academic medicine, etc. Some people may say prestige is a factor for them, and while I don't think it's an entirely logical reason, it's a valid one. Why force someone into something they don't want to do? If they want to go MD or do something else rather than go DO for prestige reasons, that's on them, silly as many of us might think it is, and they just won't get to be a doctor.

Oh I completely agree there are logical reasons not to go DO. I'm just stating a big part of why SMP's exist is because of that relatively strong desire not to go DO and to bone for the MD, regardless of whether or not it is well thought out or if it is purely irrational.

 

[22031 Alum]

It's fascinating really, and while what MeatTornado and all the other residents are saying here are valid about the limitations of a DO, you have to remember who these people are. These are some very high end MD graduates. Their peers and where they applied to aren't going to be DO's in most cases and the types of programs they looked into are exactly the type to discriminate against DO's. Many many quality programs, even if they aren't that kind of tier or close to it that these residents are at, are viable options for DO's.

You may not mean it this way, but this strikes me as dismissive hand waving. The residents posting here may well have never considered going DO, and be at a top program where DO's need not apply. But academic medicine is a small world. I guarantee their fund of knowledge of the quality of programs in their specialties started to build as fourth year students at the latest. They have worked with attendings who trained at programs across the spectrum of their field. They have networked with more people from a variety of programs over the years, and heard the "scuttlebutt" about places across the country. They have likely been involved in resident selection and have learned about different med schools all across the country that way. If they remain in academics as faculty, their knowledge in this area will grow even more- exponentially, even. How do I know this? Because academic medicine is a small world, and that's how it works. So I don't want anyone dismissing the very valid points being made by the MDs here just because their own med school and residency search experience doesn't exactly mirror a DO's.

 

[GrapesofRath]

You may not mean it this way, but this strikes me as dismissive hand waving. The residents posting here may well have never considered going DO, and be at a top program where DO's need not apply. But academic medicine is a small world. I guarantee their fund of knowledge of the quality of programs in their specialties started to build as fourth year students at the latest. They have worked with attendings who trained at programs across the spectrum of their field. They have networked with more people from a variety of programs over the years, and heard the "scuttlebutt" about places across the country. They have likely been involved in resident selection and have learned about different med schools all across the country that way. If they remain in academics as faculty, their knowledge in this area will grow even more- exponentially, even. How do I know this? Because academic medicine is a small world, and that's how it works. So I don't want anyone dismissing the very valid points being made by the MDs here just because their own med school and residency search experience doesn't exactly mirror a DO's.

Yeah that wasn't what I meant at all. I fully buy(and can see) they know what they are talking about when talking about the DO route. I even said their points were valid. It's just you can in cases get a different perspective talking about the limitations of a DO degree from top end MD graduates, low end MD graduates aiming more for primary care and those who are DO's themselves. That's really the point. It's important for a pre-med to weigh all of them if they can.

 

[WingedOx]

You may not mean it this way, but this strikes me as dismissive hand waving. The residents posting here may well have never considered going DO, and be at a top program where DO's need not apply. But academic medicine is a small world. I guarantee their fund of knowledge of the quality of programs in their specialties started to build as fourth year students at the latest. They have worked with attendings who trained at programs across the spectrum of their field. They have networked with more people from a variety of programs over the years, and heard the "scuttlebutt" about places across the country. They have likely been involved in resident selection and have learned about different med schools all across the country that way. If they remain in academics as faculty, their knowledge in this area will grow even more- exponentially, even. How do I know this? Because academic medicine is a small world, and that's how it works. So I don't want anyone dismissing the very valid points being made by the MDs here just because their own med school and residency search experience doesn't exactly mirror a DO's.

While this is true, the particular poster that GrapesofRath was referring to has had a strong tendency to discuss this issue with more hyperbole than is necessary in a manner that is... shall we say... 'non-dispassionate'. There are plenty of people on these boards willing to give reasonable and nuanced critiques of the DO degree, but he isn't one I'd choose.

 

[deleted407021]

There's no shame in being a do. You're a doctor

This premed dork at my clinic insisted that they really weren't, despite there being a DO pulm/cc doc in the room next to him. I really think it's a mindset endemic to ignorant/arrogant premeds and some of the lay public.

 

[ZedsDed]

SMP's wouldn't exist if there weren't hoards of people just like your peers you are talking about. Even intelligent rational people I've talked who are your generic 3.5/32 borderline applicants have started throwing the idea of "PA" or "Dental School" around if they don't get into MD schools before pursuing the DO route. I remember reading something a while back how there is an adviser at Princeton who has tried for so long to do all he can to get all the people from Princeton to get shut out from MD's to consider the DO route and has basically just given up because of how many people stubbornly oppose it.

It's fascinating really, and while what MeatTornado and all the other residents are saying here are valid about the limitations of a DO, you have to remember who these people are. These are some very high end MD graduates. Their peers and where they applied to aren't going to be DO's in most cases and the types of programs they looked into are exactly the type to discriminate against DO's. Many many quality programs, even if they aren't that kind of tier or close to it that these residents are at, are viable options for DO's. Many fields be it anasthesiology, pathology, EM, neurology etc are viable fields for DO's. The idea the generic pre-med will tort that DO's can usually only do primary care or have to work in community hospitals that are rather limited in what they can do is shall we say not very informed.

I don't think that's entirely true. I understand your sentiment, but I personally believe that there are perfectly logical reasons that someone might not want to go DO, including wanting to go into a highly competitive specialty, wanting to go into research, wanting to go into academic medicine, etc. Some people may say prestige is a factor for them, and while I don't think it's an entirely logical reason, it's a valid one. Why force someone into something they don't want to do? If they want to go MD or do something else rather than go DO for prestige reasons, that's on them, silly as many of us might think it is, and they just won't get to be a doctor.

This is not to take away from your point that the vast majority of premeds are greatly misinformed about DOs; rather, it aims to present reasons why someone might make this choice.

I'm optimistic (naive?) enough to hope that the majority of students who avoid going the DO route do so for legitimate reasons. There are practical reasons for wanting to garner prestige. Wanting to get the MD letters behind your name so you can "pick up hot chicks yo" is not one of them. In fact, I'm inclined to think that if your priorities are chicks>money>bragging rights>>>>>>>>healing people...then perhaps there are other careers that you are better suited for.

 

[deleted407021]

I'm optimistic (naive?) enough to hope that the majority of students who avoid going the DO route do so for legitimate reasons. There are practical reasons for wanting to garner prestige. Wanting to get the MD letters behind your name so you can "pick up hot chicks yo" is not one of them. In fact, I'm inclined to think that if your priorities are chicks>money>bragging rights>>>>>>>>healing people...then perhaps there are other careers that you are better suited for.

I'm inclined to think the kind of people who'd rather not be a doctor than be a DO probably don't belong in med school, anywhere.

 

[Lawpy]

I'm more focused on the DO education structure and find out whether the differences are significant enough to warrant a split from the MD route. The actual personal preferences/scenarios/circumstances for going MD over DO are essentially irrelevant.