low down on Nova

[mdoclau]

Another thread was posted on nycom now I am asking about Nova

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Orthodoc40]

Asking what?

 

[mdoclau]

THe lowdown on the school, professors, students cost of living partying

 

[HemaOncoDoc]

THe lowdown on the school, professors, students cost of living partying

Check out the threads for NSU.

 

[Fin-Nor]

low down is that there are orgies that goes on in the omt lab with cadavers.

 

[Faraaz23]

THe lowdown on the school, professors, students cost of living partying

nice facilities, some good/some bad, expensive, and south beach is 30 minutes away.... you figure that one out.

 

[Dr JPH]

THe lowdown on the school, professors, students cost of living partying

Half of their clinical departments are chaired by MDs

Take that any way you like

 

[It'sElectric]

Half of their clinical departments are chaired by MDs

Take that any way you like

I swear on my mother's life that I'm not trying to incite anything here, but how should one take that (above)? A couple thoughts come to mind, but my guess is that it ultimately means nothing.

 

[mikeyb01]

I swear on my mother's life that I'm not trying to incite anything here, but how should one take that (above)? A couple thoughts come to mind, but my guess is that it ultimately means nothing.

Agreed. I don't think it should mean much of anything.

 

[Dr.Inviz]

I swear on my mother's life that I'm not trying to incite anything here, but how should one take that (above)? A couple thoughts come to mind, but my guess is that it ultimately means nothing.

It's very, very horrible. Don't go to NSUCOM because they're loaded with MDs.

 

[Dr JPH]

Agreed. I don't think it should mean much of anything.

So you have MDs heading clinical departments at an osteopathic school. I wonder waht sort of OPP & OMT integration there is in the courses. My guess would be not a whole lot.

And we wonder why so many DOs dont use OMT.

Maybe its because there are DO schools out there where the professors dont use it.

Seems important to me.

But I guess if you have no interest in OMM (and yet, youre at a DO school) I guess it wouldnt matter.

 

[MikeyLu2010]

....or ppl become surgeons

 

[Dr JPH]

....or ppl become surgeons

Not sure what thats supposed to mean, but if you are implying that OMM and Surgery arent closely related, or that surgical patients cant benefit tremendously from OMM, then you would be very wrong.

More evidence that they arent teaching you properly down there in floreeda.

Thanks for the first hand proof

 

[DrQuinn]

So you have MDs heading clinical departments at an osteopathic school. I wonder waht sort of OPP & OMT integration there is in the courses. My guess would be not a whole lot.

And we wonder why so many DOs dont use OMT.

Maybe its because there are DO schools out there where the professors dont use it.

Seems important to me.

But I guess if you have no interest in OMM (and yet, youre at a DO school) I guess it wouldnt matter.

Actually one of the dept heads at NSUCOM's OMM department is one of the editors for the Journal of the AOA and is HUGELY into the UAAO and OMT/OPP whatever you want to call it. Their OMM department is probably just as strong as any other schools, and with their OMM fellowship they have there, very young, enthusiastic, and willing to teach those that are into it.

Q

 

[Fin-Nor]

in addition to that, if u match into their core rotation at Florida Hospital East orlando, you'll get to work with Dr. Crow -- who is a big name in teaching ligamentous articular strain, BMT or watever else you want to call it. Real world OMT in hospitalized patients.

 

[w a n g]

also, we play ping pong and muscle energy before sexual encounters.

 

[MikeyLu2010]

no im saying surgeons dont do a lot of OMM...dono how u missed that..but plz continue to hate on us

 

[Dr JPH]

in addition to that, if u match into their core rotation at Florida Hospital East orlando, you'll get to work with Dr. Crow -- who is a big name in teaching ligamentous articular strain, BMT or watever else you want to call it. Real world OMT in hospitalized patients.

I know Dr Crow well. He is an asset, no doubt.

I would like to hear how the surgical department covers OMM in their course and how much OMM your surgery department chair does on his patients.

 

[Dr JPH]

but plz continue to hate on us

I dont know whats funnier, the fact that you are misinterpreting my intentions or that you actual said "hate on us".

 

[MikeyLu2010]

werd.

 

[GregsAnatomy]

I know Dr Crow well. He is an asset, no doubt.

I would like to hear how the surgical department covers OMM in their course and how much OMM your surgery department chair does on his patients.

You win on this one JP....

No OMM is covered in surgery lectures. Most of the surgery attendings during third year are MD's and as such little OMM is taught. The chair of surgery is an MD, JD opthamologist who I don't believe sees any patients anyway.

Yes, I heard your excellent talk at the SOSA conference, but how many DO surgeons actually do OMM anyway...

 

[Dr JPH]

Yes, I heard your excellent talk at the SOSA conference, but how many DO surgeons actually do OMM anyway...

Not enough, thats my point.

And its not about winning. Unfortunately the large majority of DO surgeons, or DOs for that matter, do not use OMM. The places where OMT has been shown beneficial are numerous, yet the excuses for NOT going OMT remain more numerous.

The AOA continues to bombard us with initiatives and ideas on improving osteopathic medicine, starting with increasing public awareness.

Well, how about doing so through providing our patients with a beneficial treatment modality that can be used along with our current medical knowledge?

Its time for the "Separate but equal" bull$hit to stop and time to leave behind the "DOs offer something else" line unless we can justify it.

OMM has turned into a cultist art. 50 years ago ALL DOs were cultists and not fit for medical practice and now the ones who use OMT are classified as such.

The majority of DOs are so worried about what their allopathic colleagues would think if they starting using OMT that they dismiss it altogether.

So we went from a proud profession working hard to secure our rights as physicians to a group willing to turn on eachother at the first hint of disbelief or skepticism from the MD community. Pathetic and embarassing.

It bothers me when I hear speakers say things like "you should be proud to be a DO" and "we offer something that our MD counterparts dont" and "remember, youre a DO so think like a DO"...yet none of them could find, diagnose or treat a somatic dysfunction to save their lives.

I prefer not to be one of the wannabes.

A DO who turns their back on what it means to be a DO is nothing but a second rate allopath...just some guy or girl who bombed the MCAT and kissed the wrong ass in college.

Now I will sit back and wait for the inevitable "DOs are just like MDs" crap that people love to regurgitate.

Let me get off my soapbox for a moment and get my wading boots.

 

[mikeyb01]

Not enough, thats my point.

And its not about winning. Unfortunately the large majority of DO surgeons, or DOs for that matter, do not use OMM. The places where OMT has been shown beneficial are numerous, yet the excuses for NOT going OMT remain more numerous.

The AOA continues to bombard us with initiatives and ideas on improving osteopathic medicine, starting with increasing public awareness.

Well, how about doing so through providing our patients with a beneficial treatment modality that can be used along with our current medical knowledge?

Its time for the "Separate but equal" bull$hit to stop and time to leave behind the "DOs offer something else" line unless we can justify it.

OMM has turned into a cultist art. 50 years ago ALL DOs were cultists and not fit for medical practice and now the ones who use OMT are classified as such.

The majority of DOs are so worried about what their allopathic colleagues would think if they starting using OMT that they dismiss it altogether.

So we went from a proud profession working hard to secure our rights as physicians to a group willing to turn on eachother at the first hint of disbelief or skepticism from the MD community. Pathetic and embarassing.

It bothers me when I hear speakers say things like "you should be proud to be a DO" and "we offer something that our MD counterparts dont" and "remember, youre a DO so think like a DO"...yet none of them could find, diagnose or treat a somatic dysfunction to save their lives.

I prefer not to be one of the wannabes.

A DO who turns their back on what it means to be a DO is nothing but a second rate allopath...just some guy or girl who bombed the MCAT and kissed the wrong ass in college.

Now I will sit back and wait for the inevitable "DOs are just like MDs" crap that people love to regurgitate.

Let me get off my soapbox for a moment and get my wading boots.

For what it's worth, I think JP makes several good points here but disagree that a DO without OMM is a second-rate MD, etc. Our exposure to things and experiences are what shape us. If you learned OMM and weren't grabbed enough by it to become a zealot then so be it. It could be denial because I think some of that stuff is pretty hokey.

Fortunately or unfortunately, I think a lot of people's opinions are formed during the first two years of medical school. Some of us aren't taught a real great understanding of what to use and when aside from HVLA, ME, counterstrain, and soft tissue techniques. We spend our third and fourth years cracking the backs of friends and family only and then go on to ACGME residencies. Are all of us wannabes? Will we graduate to be any less of a doctor? Certainly not.

At the end of the day, I don't think OMM is what makes or breaks a DO nor is it the be-all, end-all of the profession. My $0.02

 

[Kuba]

JP,

Although my pre-med(am I one anymore?) opinion doesn't matter to you, I think that was an excellent post. Caught me off guard

At the very least, every DO should approach OMT with an open mind, and I get the impression that it doesn't always happen.

 

[w a n g]

Not enough, thats my point.

And its not about winning. Unfortunately the large majority of DO surgeons, or DOs for that matter, do not use OMM. The places where OMT has been shown beneficial are numerous, yet the excuses for NOT going OMT remain more numerous.

The AOA continues to bombard us with initiatives and ideas on improving osteopathic medicine, starting with increasing public awareness.

Well, how about doing so through providing our patients with a beneficial treatment modality that can be used along with our current medical knowledge?

Its time for the "Separate but equal" bull$hit to stop and time to leave behind the "DOs offer something else" line unless we can justify it.

OMM has turned into a cultist art. 50 years ago ALL DOs were cultists and not fit for medical practice and now the ones who use OMT are classified as such.

The majority of DOs are so worried about what their allopathic colleagues would think if they starting using OMT that they dismiss it altogether.

So we went from a proud profession working hard to secure our rights as physicians to a group willing to turn on eachother at the first hint of disbelief or skepticism from the MD community. Pathetic and embarassing.

It bothers me when I hear speakers say things like "you should be proud to be a DO" and "we offer something that our MD counterparts dont" and "remember, youre a DO so think like a DO"...yet none of them could find, diagnose or treat a somatic dysfunction to save their lives.

I prefer not to be one of the wannabes.

A DO who turns their back on what it means to be a DO is nothing but a second rate allopath...just some guy or girl who bombed the MCAT and kissed the wrong ass in college.

Now I will sit back and wait for the inevitable "DOs are just like MDs" crap that people love to regurgitate.

Let me get off my soapbox for a moment and get my wading boots.

good stuff

 

[Dr JPH]

For what it's worth, I think JP makes several good points here but disagree that a DO without OMM is a second-rate MD, etc. Our exposure to things and experiences are what shape us. If you learned OMM and weren't grabbed enough by it to become a zealot then so be it. It could be denial because I think some of that stuff is pretty hokey.

Fortunately or unfortunately, I think a lot of people's opinions are formed during the first two years of medical school. Some of us aren't taught a real great understanding of what to use and when aside from HVLA, ME, counterstrain, and soft tissue techniques. We spend our third and fourth years cracking the backs of friends and family only and then go on to ACGME residencies. Are all of us wannabes? Will we graduate to be any less of a doctor? Certainly not.

At the end of the day, I don't think OMM is what makes or breaks a DO nor is it the be-all, end-all of the profession. My $0.02

So what separates you as a DO if not OMM?

Where does it say you need to use OMT on every patient in every case? Why not the appropriate and judicial use of OMT as part of your treatment arsenal?

Cardiology didnt "grab" me either, but I recognize its importance and when my skills reading EKGs and auscultating heart sounds is necessary. I dont think cardiac caths are useless simply because it wasnt "my thing" in medical school.

So what makes you different besides the letters behind your name?

Except for you ability (or for many, the relative INability) to use OMM?

Nothing.

There is nothing unique in the DO curriculum besides OMM that anyone can point to and say "there...THATS why were are different...thats what makes us separate, and everything else makes us equal."

So tell me how a DO without OMM is any different than an MD with a lower MCAT.

 

[VALSALVA]

JP,

Although my pre-med(am I one anymore?)

I don't know about NSU, but at KCOM, students are considered pre-med until they pass the first quarter. At that point, they become medical students. For those of you on SDN, from KCOM, who might read this and don't believe me, check the KCOM constitution/bylaws.

 

[Faraaz23]

Not enough, thats my point.

And its not about winning. Unfortunately the large majority of DO surgeons, or DOs for that matter, do not use OMM. The places where OMT has been shown beneficial are numerous, yet the excuses for NOT going OMT remain more numerous.

The AOA continues to bombard us with initiatives and ideas on improving osteopathic medicine, starting with increasing public awareness.

Well, how about doing so through providing our patients with a beneficial treatment modality that can be used along with our current medical knowledge?

Its time for the "Separate but equal" bull$hit to stop and time to leave behind the "DOs offer something else" line unless we can justify it.

OMM has turned into a cultist art. 50 years ago ALL DOs were cultists and not fit for medical practice and now the ones who use OMT are classified as such.

The majority of DOs are so worried about what their allopathic colleagues would think if they starting using OMT that they dismiss it altogether.

So we went from a proud profession working hard to secure our rights as physicians to a group willing to turn on eachother at the first hint of disbelief or skepticism from the MD community. Pathetic and embarassing.

It bothers me when I hear speakers say things like "you should be proud to be a DO" and "we offer something that our MD counterparts dont" and "remember, youre a DO so think like a DO"...yet none of them could find, diagnose or treat a somatic dysfunction to save their lives.

I prefer not to be one of the wannabes.

A DO who turns their back on what it means to be a DO is nothing but a second rate allopath...just some guy or girl who bombed the MCAT and kissed the wrong ass in college.

Now I will sit back and wait for the inevitable "DOs are just like MDs" crap that people love to regurgitate.

Let me get off my soapbox for a moment and get my wading boots.

I do think you're making some good points, but I don't completely agree with you. And I wanted to say that I do admire that you plan on using OMM in the surgical field. But I don't think being a DO is an all-or-none thing depending on whether a person follows certain tenents of osteopathy. If you really want to argue that... you too can be classified as one of those "second-rate allopaths...some guy who bombed the MCAT and missed the wrong ass in college" because you're going into general surgery (unless i'm mistaken). Whatever happened to primary care??? Of course OMM is a huge component of our profession, but you seem to be ignoring other aspects of the osteopathic philosophy in your judgement of others.

 

[kaikai128]

I do think you're making some good points, but I don't completely agree with you. And I wanted to say that I do admire that you plan on using OMM in the surgical field. But I don't think being a DO is an all-or-none thing depending on whether a person follows certain tenents of osteopathy. If you really want to argue that... you too can be classified as one of those "second-rate allopaths...some guy who bombed the MCAT and missed the wrong ass in college" because you're going into general surgery (unless i'm mistaken). Whatever happened to primary care??? Of course OMM is a huge component of our profession, but you seem to be ignoring other aspects of the osteopathic philosophy in your judgement of others.

Medical school gives you the tools, and teaches you the techniques to practice medicine. It is up to each individual and their free will to choose if they want to use those techniques in their future careers...and I don't think it should be forced on everyone.

I came to a DO school becaue I felt that OMM would add something to my toolbelt that I could use on future patients, if I chose to do so.

I am soon going to be walking into the hospital on the first day of my third year with exactly that. I have been given all of the tools to place my hands on patients and help heal them. I thank NSU for doing a good job in educating me in the practices and principles of Osteopathic Medicine and enabling me to walk into my third year with the confidence that I lacked two years ago.

Anything that happens beyond the front doors of the Terry building, is not because of a lack of education, but because of free will of the individual students.

 

[toothless rufus]

Aside from OMM, I cannot think of any honest examples of a DO distinction. An emphasis on primary care does not mean anything else strictly osteopathic is going on, versus allopathic primary care. A lot of vague things are ususally offered, that could apply to almost any discipline. It would seem that someone would be able to jot down what these supposed concrete distinctions are, aside from OMM, (which seems to be the only actual difference) if they exist, and they insist that they indeed do. I personally am content with OMM being the only palpable difference, but would be happy to add more.

 

[Dr JPH]

I do think you're making some good points, but I don't completely agree with you. And I wanted to say that I do admire that you plan on using OMM in the surgical field. But I don't think being a DO is an all-or-none thing depending on whether a person follows certain tenents of osteopathy. If you really want to argue that... you too can be classified as one of those "second-rate allopaths...some guy who bombed the MCAT and missed the wrong ass in college" because you're going into general surgery (unless i'm mistaken). Whatever happened to primary care??? Of course OMM is a huge component of our profession, but you seem to be ignoring other aspects of the osteopathic philosophy in your judgement of others.

No where in the "tenets of osteopathy" is primary care listed. And chosing a specialty field over primary care isnt unique to DOs. No osteopathic philosophy tells me that I should be a family doc. So how I am going against osteopathy? Your argument is flawed.

A "trend" towards primary care doesnt make it a backbone of the profession.

What I am trying to get someone to explain to me is how is a DO different from an MD if that DO doesnt use OMM?

So what of the "osteopathic philosophy" makes you unique Faraaz? And could someone please explain to me what the hell the "osteopathic philosphy" is.

 

[Dr JPH]

Aside from OMM, I cannot think of any honest examples of a DO distinction. An emphasis on primary care does not mean anything else strictly osteopathic is going on, versus allopathic primary care. A lot of vague things are ususally offered, that could apply to almost any discipline. It would seem that someone would be able to jot down what these supposed concrete distinctions are, aside from OMM, (which seems to be the only actual difference) if they exist, and they insist that they indeed do. I personally am content with OMM being the only palpable difference, but would be happy to add more.

First time I have ever agreed with you rufus. Well said.

Here are the "Tenets of Osteopathy"

1. The body is a unit
2. Relationship of structure & function
3. Body possesses self-regulating & self-healing mechanisms
4. Rational therapy is based on intricate knowledge of the above 3 (losely translated tenet)

$hit. Seems like common sense to me.

#1. Body is a unit. Of course. Interwoven nerves, arteries, veins and organs that function together.

#2. Structure & function. A birds wing was built to fly. Common sense. A leg muscle was built for locomotion. Wheres the big secret here?

#3. Immune system, ability to heal a wound, scar tissue. Nothing there is magic. Its physiology.

#4. Of course you need to understand the human body in order to fix it and facilitate its healing.

NO WHERE in the tenets is OMT mentioned.

In fact, the tenets sound more like common sense rules put to paper and someone had the balls to say "these belong to DOs". I dont think so.

DO minus OMT = MD
MD plus OMT = DO

MD plus 4 tenets = MD
DO minus 4 tenets = DO

 

[toothless rufus]

Geez, I didn't realize I have been spouting so much disagreeable diatribe, lol! I respect your views, and what you have written here is exactly the truth of the matter. Say, let's be friends!

First time I have ever agreed with you rufus. Well said.

Here are the "Tenets of Osteopathy"

1. The body is a unit
2. Relationship of structure & function
3. Body possesses self-regulating & self-healing mechanisms
4. Rational therapy is based on intricate knowledge of the above 3 (losely translated tenet)

$hit. Seems like common sense to me.

#1. Body is a unit. Of course. Interwoven nerves, arteries, veins and organs that function together.

#2. Structure & function. A birds wing was built to fly. Common sense. A leg muscle was built for locomotion. Wheres the big secret here?

#3. Immune system, ability to heal a wound, scar tissue. Nothing there is magic. Its physiology.

#4. Of course you need to understand the human body in order to fix it and facilitate its healing.

NO WHERE in the tenets is OMT mentioned.

In fact, the tenets sound more like common sense rules put to paper and someone had the balls to say "these belong to DOs". I dont think so.

DO minus OMT = MD
MD plus OMT = DO

MD plus 4 tenets = MD
DO minus 4 tenets = DO

 

[Faraaz23]

No where in the "tenets of osteopathy" is primary care listed. And chosing a specialty field over primary care isnt unique to DOs. No osteopathic philosophy tells me that I should be a family doc. So how I am going against osteopathy? Your argument is flawed.

A "trend" towards primary care doesnt make it a backbone of the profession.

What I am trying to get someone to explain to me is how is a DO different from an MD if that DO doesnt use OMM?

So what of the "osteopathic philosophy" makes you unique Faraaz? And could someone please explain to me what the hell the "osteopathic philosphy" is.

I'm not saying I am unique.. in fact I probably won't go in to primary care either. My whole point was though, I AM NOT the one sitting behind my computer, damning others for not being good osteopathic physicians (we are not just osteopaths). Let me put this another way if my point was not clear. I may or may not choose to practice OMT down the road. However, I will embrace certain other things that are stressed in our profession. Even in my limited medical education so far, I have witnessed difference between treating a patient according to lab and imaging results, vs taking a step back and looking at the patient from another prospective. Sure, many MD schools emphasize this too. But so do we... thats what matters to me. Maybe I plan to represent the osteopathic philosophy by serving others. And how are you taking shots at NSU for not teaching students properly when you, as a graduating DO, are asking for someone to explain what the hell the "osteopathic philosophy" is? You guys could very well have a better OMM education than us, but how do you or I know that? Can you seriously tell what kind of an education NSU provides from the comments of a few random students on an internet message board?

If 20 years down the road, OMT catches on in the allopathic community (I have no clue if the Harvard CME program on OMT is just a random thing or the start of a new trend) and more MD's start to learn it, are you going to say we need to find something else they can't do? At that point, what differentiates the DO? Are we, at that point, all psuedo-DO's for not being able to do something they don't do?

I have a question for you. Besides doing it for its value to patient care, do you think we should practice OMT so that we know we are different... or that everyone else sees that we are different from an MD?

 

[igcgnerd]

First time I have ever agreed with you rufus. Well said.

Here are the "Tenets of Osteopathy"

1. The body is a unit
2. Relationship of structure & function
3. Body possesses self-regulating & self-healing mechanisms
4. Rational therapy is based on intricate knowledge of the above 3 (losely translated tenet)

$hit. Seems like common sense to me.

#1. Body is a unit. Of course. Interwoven nerves, arteries, veins and organs that function together.

#2. Structure & function. A birds wing was built to fly. Common sense. A leg muscle was built for locomotion. Wheres the big secret here?

#3. Immune system, ability to heal a wound, scar tissue. Nothing there is magic. Its physiology.

#4. Of course you need to understand the human body in order to fix it and facilitate its healing.

NO WHERE in the tenets is OMT mentioned.

In fact, the tenets sound more like common sense rules put to paper and someone had the balls to say "these belong to DOs". I dont think so.

DO minus OMT = MD
MD plus OMT = DO

MD plus 4 tenets = MD
DO minus 4 tenets = DO

This should be a sticky

 

[DrQuinn]

Get off your high horse, and stop alienating your fellow DOs.

I am a DO. Proud of it.

But I don't use OMT on patients.

I do give something different. Ask all my patients. Ask why the nurses in my ED ask for ME to see their family and friends. Ask my fellow MDs and DOs who say that they would trust me with their loved ones. Just because I do not use manipulation in my active practice, doesn't mean I don't embrace the DO philosophy, and my patients, nurses, and colleagues can see that, and they like that.

You are an expletive, my friend.

Q

 

[Dr JPH]

I do give something different.

I would love to hear what that is.

You are an expletive, my friend.

Because I tell the truth?

 

[Dr JPH]

And how are you taking shots at NSU for not teaching students properly when you, as a graduating DO, are asking for someone to explain what the hell the "osteopathic philosophy" is?

My point is that there IS no osteopathic philosophy.

Without OMT DOs offer nothing unique.

After teaching this stuff for the last 3 years I have come to the realization that our entire sense of being different is flawed unless we use OMT to treat our patients.

I dont order fewer or different tests. I dont think about clinical problems differently, unless its a muscoloskeltal issue. I dont order less or different antibiotics. I dont palpate a gallbladder and skip the ultrasound. Yes, my palpatory skills and my diagnosis might be aided because of being a DO, but I dont have anything else than and other physician doesnt have.

Do I think we should be MDs? No. We definately offer something different and thats OMT. But not one thing in my approach to a patient is different than that of an MD. We arent kinder, gentler people that some have said. Personality is personality. Do I seem kinder and gentler? I did an extra year in a DO school so $hit, I should be the nicest doc in the world.

Its all about what you learn. I have additional skills as a DO but I dont have a different mindset.

I challenge you to tell me how the cardiology I learned at PCOM is more "osteopathic" than the cardiology they teach at Jefferson or Penn. How is my surgical training any different if not for the incorporation of OMT?

My physical diagnosis course is exactly the same except for a more thorough MSK exam, perhaps with some visceral clues to diagnosis as well. All OMT based.

I dont hold my patients hand longer or harder. I dont cry or smile or buy my patients cookies...if I did that would be a reflection of me and not my D.O. degree.

Can SOMEONE please tell me what the osteopathic philosphy is? Anyone? Because I never learned it. I think I had to know it when I applied in the off chance that an admissions person asked. I think I had to know that, along with a few dates, for my first OMM exam.

But HOW can you distinguish a DO from any MD except for the fact that the DO can (and should) use OMT?

You can't.

We took standard common sense "rules" and called them the "Tenets of Osteopathy". Now we teach them as the defining characteristics of our profession.

Bullcrap dogma.

 

[DrQuinn]

I would love to hear what that is.




Because I tell the truth?

A) My bedside manner, the way I interact with my patients, and my personal practice philosophy.


And I do not believe you tell the truth, that a DO who doesn't practice OMT isn't a DO. There is much more to OPP that HVLA, soft tissue techniques, craniosacral, or whatever technique you prefer. It is a philosophy, remember that. Don't you remember the AOA's campaign, about "treating patients, not symptoms?" It was a push that the AOA supported, to strengthen the DO philosophy. Since those times, I have strived to do that myself. This was when I was a wee MS1, so perhaps you were still only a pre med or a high schooler, at the time, so you may not remember.

Q

 

[Dr JPH]

A) My bedside manner, the way I interact with my patients, and my personal practice philosophy.


And I do not believe you tell the truth, that a DO who doesn't practice OMT isn't a DO. There is much more to OPP that HVLA, soft tissue techniques, craniosacral, or whatever technique you prefer. It is a philosophy, remember that. Don't you remember the AOA's campaign, about "treating patients, not symptoms?" It was a push that the AOA supported, to strengthen the DO philosophy. Since those times, I have strived to do that myself. This was when I was a wee MS1, so perhaps you were still only a pre med or a high schooler, at the time, so you may not remember.

Q

Quinn, I have been a fan of your posts for the last 7 years. I was indeed only in college when I joined here, roughly the same time as you. Back when SDN had a membership of 1,100 people.

I am aware of the AOA campaign and their strives to distinguish the osteopathic profession.

But the idea of "Treating the patient not the symptoms" isnt a uniquely osteopathic ideal.

That term was coined by an AOA that was seeing its membership dwindle and the general DO population become frustrated over not having something to call their own.

So instead of pushing OMT, they came up with a lame (but inspirational) tagline to attach to osteopathy.

They said "what is something that sounds good, will work in the patients favor and makes us look like caring, handholding docs".

Ah-ha!

Sorry, but a motto doesnt make me different than an MD.

My ability to diagnose and treat using my hands does.

 

[Prodigy]

A) My bedside manner, the way I interact with my patients, and my personal practice philosophy.


And I do not believe you tell the truth, that a DO who doesn't practice OMT isn't a DO. There is much more to OPP that HVLA, soft tissue techniques, craniosacral, or whatever technique you prefer. It is a philosophy, remember that. Don't you remember the AOA's campaign, about "treating patients, not symptoms?" It was a push that the AOA supported, to strengthen the DO philosophy. Since those times, I have strived to do that myself. This was when I was a wee MS1, so perhaps you were still only a pre med or a high schooler, at the time, so you may not remember.

Q

Bedside manner? Is that even a legit answer? There are as many DOs as there are MDs with bedside manner as there are those without bedside manner. MDs get the blame for having none because the public is more familiar with them and there are more of them.

DO is nothing more than MD+OMM. Let it rest now. MDs also look at the whole body system and see how integrative the mechanisms and physiologies really are. No longer are MDs simply focusing on the disease at hand -- they check everything and see how one affects the other, etc. I don't see how this so-called osteopathic philosophy is markedly different from what is now the philosophy of medicine.

 

[It'sElectric]

Bedside manner? Is that even a legit answer? There are as many DOs as there are MDs with bedside manner as there are those without bedside manner. MDs get the blame for having none because the public is more familiar with them and there are more of them.

DO is nothing more than MD+OMM. Let it rest now. MDs also look at the whole body system and see how integrative the mechanisms and physiologies really are. No longer are MDs simply focusing on the disease at hand -- they check everything and see how one affects the other, etc. I don't see how this so-called osteopathic philosophy is markedly different from what is now the philosophy of medicine.

I love it when a pre-med tries to educate an actual physician. Fuc*ing priceless.

For what it's worth, my purely anecdotal evidence does support the idea that I am receiving an education more heavily focused on effectively treating the patient's mind, body, and spirit. Through discussions with 2 friends at MD schools, it has become quite apparent that this is the truth. Like I said, this is PURELY anecdotal and really only pertains to 3 schools (2 MD, 1 DO) - not exactly a representative sample.

Nevertheless, I truly believe that my school is preparing me to be a better physician as I learn to treat all aspects of my patient's life. Is it because I go to a DO school? Maybe....who knows. I do know that 3 years from now I will be a DO (not an MD), and I will owe a large part of what kind of physician I become to the education that I received.

 

[DragonWell]

I'm amazed that people continue to NOT get the point of the osteopathic philosophy. It is not in any way intended to be "unique." It is simply the philosophy by which osteopathic medicine was created and exists. It makes no difference if other people believe the same principles or even if the principals are simply common sense because it is just spelling out the philosophy we agree to uphold in the osteopathic pledge.

Lots of organizations have a "philosophy." The Boy Scouts have one, most religions have one. It makes no difference that both the Catholics and Boy Scouts pledge to be reverent. Neither side claims a sole, unique hold on being reverent. They simply have spelled out (in writing) some of the principals they they hold dear and have pledged to live by.

It just doesn't make a difference whether MD's believe the same way because they haven't put the commitment down on paper to follow those principlals. That's what is is-- a commitment. That's all it is. It's not trying to be different or unique or the only people who can claim that the body is a unit. Yes, many DO's like to point out the philosophy, but it's not that they really are any different. They know that. They are highlighting the principals they agreed to live by. Sure, some of them might get a little "high and mighty" now and then, but what organization doesn't have it's radicals? What specialty doesn't think they are better than all the rest? What group of alumni doesn't think they went to the best school? If you want to turn it into something else...go ahead.

I think scpod offered a useful perspective on this issue, which I also happen to agree with.

 

[DragonWell]

I love it when a pre-med tries to educate an actual physician. Fuc*ing priceless.

How do you know he's a pre-med? From his post, I assumed he had an MD and a DO!

 

[CommanderRiker]

Get off your high horse, and stop alienating your fellow DOs.

I am a DO. Proud of it.

But I don't use OMT on patients.

I do give something different. Ask all my patients. Ask why the nurses in my ED ask for ME to see their family and friends. Ask my fellow MDs and DOs who say that they would trust me with their loved ones. Just because I do not use manipulation in my active practice, doesn't mean I don't embrace the DO philosophy, and my patients, nurses, and colleagues can see that, and they like that.

You are an expletive, my friend.

Q

No. I've met and currently work with many M.D.s who have excellent bedside manners and are very compassionate. I have worked with many D.O.s I won't trust leaving a one-dollar bill with. This idea you have, that D.O.s are more caring or taught to be more caring, is false in my opinion. I've been around a lot of doctors and "caring" isn't governed by the badge one wears. It's the kind of person he is that determines that.

 

[DrQuinn]

No. I've met and currently work with many M.D.s who have excellent bedside manners and are very compassionate. I have worked with many D.O.s I won't trust leaving a one-dollar bill with. This idea you have, that D.O.s are more caring or taught to be more caring, is false in my opinion. I've been around a lot of doctors and "caring" isn't governed by the badge one wears. It's the kind of person he is that determines that.

I'm not saying my approach is unique to myself, or DOs. But I feel, that through my osteopathic education, that it did shape where I am today. And I have worked with FAR more DOs and MDs than any of you have, considering my experience. And I do notice a difference in my philosophy. Each person's education, in medical school, clerkships, residency, is shaped by how they interpret what they are taught.

I interpreted the tenets of Osteopathy in my own way, and use it in my practice, in my own unique way. Just because I do not use OMT doesn't mean that I am any less of an osteopathic physician.

Q

 

[Dr JPH]

But I feel, that through my osteopathic education, that it did shape where I am today.

OK, now my response to that would be

"Is this a reflection of the particular school you went to, the professors you had and the clinical mentors you had.?"

OR

"Is this because you went to a DO school?"

I would think that it would be the former. Thats just how I see it.

And for the rest of the forum...this is more of a medical student (at least) and D.O. discussion. Not a premed discussion.

In fact, no where on SDN is there a less appropriate conversation for premeds to be entering. Riker...sit this one out. I am sure there are people boozing it up somewhere that need your guidance and snide comments. I think its totally innapropriate for a premed to contradict Quinn, an actual D.O. Who also happens to be one of the people I looked up to a great deal when I was a premed hanging out here looking for guidance.

End of mini anti-premed rant.

In other words, let the people who have true input talk about this, not the people whose experience of DOs is limited to their family doc, 2 hours of shadowing and a read-through of Gevitz.

 

[cmeshy]

I want to start by saying it is refreshing to read an interesting and mature debate on an issue I am currently trying to figure out for myself. As my OMS-1 year comes to an exciting end, I have battled trying to find an identity for myself and the education I am receiving.

I am very satisfied with my school, its facilites, faculty, and the possibilities the future holds. I would not change my choice of attendance for Harvard being given the chance. At the moment, I do not feel that I have limited myself in any way by attending a DO medical school. I am proud to be here and actual enjoy the uniqueness that comes with being a minority. But is that minority actually justified in this modern time? I suppose that is what I am trying to figure out...and I suppose the AOA is doing same considering the recent and much needed reassessment of their GME. I still don't understand that 5 states would want to discriminate its own small brotherhood with antiquated licensure restrictions. My beef with the AOA GME is a whole other story.

In the current moment, I am going to have to agree with much of JP's statements and rational. I for one thought the AOA's "treating the patient not the disease" was a snide jab at our fellow MD colleagues and not professional. It is a great quality for a DO, but it doesn't do anything but come across as that MD's do not do this and DOs do. "Equal but better" does nothing but burn bridges.
I also agree that from what I've seen so far, OPP are great physician qualities, but I wouldn't say they are unique to DOs (or at least I hope not)! I have not found OMM/OPP encorporated into any class outside of the 3 hours per week of OMM. How am I to draw an OPP connection to phys, cell, or micro when my unique DO education never mentions it? Granted I am a bright person and could find valid connections, but how can my DO education be called unique when its never mentioned or in the curriculum? OMM also carries a very strange aura with its methods of instruction. Many of the brightest students in my class have mentioned this and we find discern with the "just trust us, it works" philosophy. Their stories of miracles are inspiring and paint a picture of OMMs possibilities, but like JP mentions: that is OMM, not some unique philisophy or tenet. So how are we different outside of manipulations and the extra hands on training (which I do enjoy)? I do believe medicine still contains an art form even to this day, but I want some proof as a student drudging through core sciences for this and the next year to the reason for an Osteopathic identity.

So, I suppose I reach out to you Dr Q, whose posts I have always enjoyed (especially being an EMT-P, now OMS-1 with of course emergency medicine interest), and to you JP...how do I describe to uninformed people and friends what I am going through and why the DO side of medicine is even needed? How do I show them I am proud of what I am going through, that I am over the bruised ego of a mediocre MCAT score, and also demostrate to them the valid need for the Osteopathic branch of medicine being its own entity? What do you two, or anyone else involved for that matter, take away from the uniqueness that DOs offer OUTSIDE of OMM?

I hope I didn't come across as degratory to our organization. I am blessed and honored to have been given a chance to practice medicine...its just, will I really be practicing Osteopathic medicine or just medicine? Does anyone see a possible change in the Osteopathic future as the US medical infrastructure is sure to take an overhaul in the near future?

Thanks guys!

 

[DrQuinn]

OK, now my response to that would be

"Is this a reflection of the particular school you went to, the professors you had and the clinical mentors you had.?"

OR

"Is this because you went to a DO school?"

Its impossible for me to answer, as I've only had one osteopathic education. Its just something I graduated medical school with.

I doubt it happened in residency, as I practice very differentn from my fellow residents at the time....

Q

 

[DrQuinn]

I also agree that from what I've seen so far, OPP are great physician qualities, but I wouldn't say they are unique to DOs (or at least I hope not)! I have not found OMM/OPP encorporated into any class outside of the 3 hours per week of OMM. How am I to draw an OPP connection to phys, cell, or micro when my unique DO education never mentions it? Granted I am a bright person and could find valid connections, but how can my DO education be called unique when its never mentioned or in the curriculum? OMM also carries a very strange aura with its methods of instruction. Many of the brightest students in my class have mentioned this and we find discern with the "just trust us, it works" philosophy. Their stories of miracles are inspiring and paint a picture of OMMs possibilities, but like JP mentions: that is OMM, not some unique philisophy or tenet. So how are we different outside of manipulations and the extra hands on training (which I do enjoy)? I do believe medicine still contains an art form even to this day, but I want some proof as a student drudging through core sciences for this and the next year to the reason for an Osteopathic identity.

So, I suppose I reach out to you Dr Q, whose posts I have always enjoyed (especially being an EMT-P, now OMS-1 with of course emergency medicine interest), and to you JP...how do I describe to uninformed people and friends what I am going through and why the DO side of medicine is even needed? How do I show them I am proud of what I am going through, that I am over the bruised ego of a mediocre MCAT score, and also demostrate to them the valid need for the Osteopathic branch of medicine being its own entity? What do you two, or anyone else involved for that matter, take away from the uniqueness that DOs offer OUTSIDE of OMM?

When people ask me what a DO is (and it happens quite often, there are very few DOs in the Washignton DC area), I tell them this. "Its very similar to a blend of MDs and chiropracters, but also with a different philosophy." No one ever asks for a further explanation than that.

So, it nods to JP that manipulation (hence, chiropracters), but also my end, a philosophical difference.