M.D.s and D.O.s Moving toward a Single, Unified Accreditation System for GME

[calvnandhobbs68]

---

Members do not see this ad.

couldn't this just as easily be attributed to the amount of time focusing on the usmle versus comlex since the material is not only written different but also has different content emphasized?

lol yes this is usually what it is. If you look at the residency forums, it's well known that if you just pass the comlex but destroy you usmle you're in good position. The other way around...not so much. The usmle is well known to be the harder of the exams.

 

[JGimpel]

Here's the official video on what's supposed to happen due to the agreement, from Sam the Eagle himself:

http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=115861

The AOA will have veto power over anything detrimental to Osteopathic Medicine; I can't wait to see how that plays out. I love it, he talks about DOs being represented on every specialty board in the ACGME. How many do you think will be on each board, 1 or 2 versus 10 other MDs? I can't wait until the first DO suggests Cranial for anything and gets promptly STFU.

It's been a fun week.

Sent from my...Nobody gives a crap about what type of phone you have

 

[K31]

Do you all think they will make MD applicants take the COMLEX to apply for the AOA residencies? That just seems silly to me. I think the ACGME could exert some pressure and force them to accept the USMLE. I think they'll end up having to accept both. Maybe they will keep the COMLEX around as a way to protect the DO graduates who couldn't do well on the USMLE but could pass the COMLEX.

If the COMLEX were to become a OMM-only test, then yes, I could see it becoming the main "check point" for them (us) being allowed to apply to AOA residencies.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

couldn't this just as easily be attributed to the amount of time focusing on the usmle versus comlex since the material is not only written different but also has different content emphasized?

From what I've heard the USMLE tests everything the COMLEX tests and to a more in depth point.

 

[oms2]

From what I've heard the USMLE tests everything the COMLEX tests and to a more in depth point.

well, the usmle doesn't cover omm.
the most obvious difference is in how the exam questions are worded, the amount of details like history and findings, and the answer choices.

 

[Brutal Honesty]

For those of you arguing that MD students likely wouldn't spend the time to learn OMM in order to apply and hopefully match to competitive residencies, beware: I am one of those that would. We exist. The only reason I chose MD over my DO acceptances is because of cost. All of my DO schools were far more expensive than my MD schools. I prefer the philosophy of DO (OPP), but simultaneously don't see the efficacy of OMM. In fact, I'd love to head a RCT examining the efficacy of OMM once and for all.

That said, I'm sure "we" don't exist in droves and will likely only marginally affect those gunning for spots in AOA Neurosx, Ortho, Derm, et cetera residencies.

Great thread guys.

 

[ModernAlchemist]

For those of you arguing that MD students likely wouldn't spend the time to learn OMM in order to apply and hopefully match to competitive residencies, beware: I am one of those that would. We exist. The only reason I chose MD over my DO acceptances is because of cost. All of my DO schools were far more expensive than my MD schools. I prefer the philosophy of DO (OPP), but simultaneously don't see the efficacy of OMM. In fact, I'd love to head a RCT examining the efficacy of OMM once and for all.

That said, I'm sure "we" don't exist in droves and will likely only marginally affect those gunning for spots in AOA Neurosx, Ortho, Derm, et cetera residencies.

Great thread guys.

First of all, thanks for stopping by. Second, the reason the efficacy of OMM can't be "validated" to many professional standards is that you cannot do a true RCT. Think about how doing double blind or selecting controls would be.

 

[Brutal Honesty]

First of all, thanks for stopping by. Second, the reason the efficacy of OMM can't be "validated" to many professional standards is that you cannot do a true RCT. Think about how doing double blind or selecting controls would be.

You're welcome!

It can be done. The true difficulty emanates from producing validated dependent variables (measures) and adequately controlling confounds. It can't be double blind, true. But many RCTs lack that small aspect. Single blind is often used in behavioral intervention RCTs (e.g., PILL-CVD) and produces generalizable data. I wonder if there's a thread talking about this?

*curious and contemplative face*

 

[488677]

For those of you arguing that MD students likely wouldn't spend the time to learn OMM in order to apply and hopefully match to competitive residencies, beware: I am one of those that would. We exist. The only reason I chose MD over my DO acceptances is because of cost. All of my DO schools were far more expensive than my MD schools. I prefer the philosophy of DO (OPP), but simultaneously don't see the efficacy of OMM. In fact, I'd love to head a RCT examining the efficacy of OMM once and for all.

That said, I'm sure "we" don't exist in droves and will likely only marginally affect those gunning for spots in AOA Neurosx, Ortho, Derm, et cetera residencies.

Great thread guys.

Please, mister, spare us DOs just a couple of residencies!

 

[xxstevecxx]

lol yes this is usually what it is. If you look at the residency forums, it's well known that if you just pass the comlex but destroy you usmle you're in good position. The other way around...not so much. The usmle is well known to be the harder of the exams.

My experience in our residency has been those that destroy the one usually destroy the other. I have yet to see a 4th year come though that did poorly on the complex that rocked the usmle. It may happen but in the pat three years I have yet to see it.

Respectfully.

 

[Guero]

FYI, I posted a poll in the allo med student forum to get a better idea of how many are willing to learn OMM & osteo topics to apply to the ROADs residencies: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=961495

 

[Mosonik]

FYI, I posted a poll in the allo med student forum to get a better idea of how many are willing to learn OMM & osteo topics to apply to the ROADs residencies: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=961495

That will be interesting to see. If no one responds thats as good as a no (if not better) because that means they don't even know what OMM is

 

[Guero]

That will be interesting to see. If no one responds thats as good as a no (if not better) because that means they don't even know what OMM is

It's going pretty darn well considering I posted it an hour ago. I'm surprised, actually.

 

[jkhamlin]

No, it isn't. From the other thread in the osteo forum, the idea of a combined match has only been brought up, not agreed upon. The AOA wants MD students to learn OMM for them to do AOA residencies. You and I both know that's not going to happen, lol. Maybe one day there will be a combined match, but this doesn't do it.

This is simple, though. ACGME threatened to block fellowships due to low AOA standards. The AOA has relented and will step up to ACGME standards to let DO students get fellowships (a good thing). Now, a few AOA residencies may need to be shut down, because they won't be able to afford to get to those standards, but I'm sure that's just a few. Ultimately, this is good news for AOA residency education.

It REALLY has absolutely nothing to do with standards. It's ALL political. In total, I think it will be a good thing, because it removes bogus beliefs like your own.

 

[411309]

It REALLY has absolutely nothing to do with standards. It's ALL political. In total, I think it will be a good thing, because it removes bogus beliefs like your own.

I like this guy.

 

[DrBumblebee]

It REALLY has absolutely nothing to do with standards. It's ALL political. In total, I think it will be a good thing, because it removes bogus beliefs like your own.

What do you mean by political? Democrats want this? or..

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

what do you mean by political? Democrats want this? Or..

....
Ama.

 

[HalfListic]

Here's the official video on what's supposed to happen due to the agreement, from Sam the Eagle himself:

http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=115861

The AOA will have veto power over anything detrimental to Osteopathic Medicine; I can't wait to see how that plays out. I love it, he talks about DOs being represented on every specialty board in the ACGME. How many do you think will be on each board, 1 or 2 versus 10 other MDs? I can't wait until the first DO suggests Cranial for anything and gets promptly STFU.

It's been a fun week.

Sent from my...Nobody gives a crap about what type of phone you have

I think you are holding on to an old notion of OM...There are a few of you still around that dont seem to get it.

Medicine is not about exclusive clubs on either side, or these nerdy "elitist" comments and attitudes. This is moving forward together...MDs wont say STFU to DOs on any board, first because they are adults, and second because they are equals. DOs will also respect MDs and recognize that they are not robots or helpless information reservoirs.

This can help us youngsters move past the old stereotypes and just work together. It sad when someone reaches in the past to gain a little feeling of control or superiority for the future. Its just not a reality anymore.



But, for the rest of us looking forward, again, this is a great movement forward to a unified approach in improving medicine in the US. yay.

 

[AlbertVOligh]

So I'm not sure if my view prior to this event was a misconception, and I was wondering if someone could clear it up for me. I thought that prior to this merger, the ACGME viewed DO's as "Independent Applicants" or some similar sounding name. This in effect gave MD the right to choose residencies first, then DO's second, then FMG/IMG third, etc. (Or maybe DO/IMG/FMG all second). Are DO's now no longer considered "independent applicants" since all their residencies will be ACGME accredited?

 

[user3]

Good question

 

[werd]

i think this is a positive development... the whole multiple "types" of residencies and separate accreditations didn't make sense for such parallel training pathways.

the back story here is that acgme was moving to make it so that you could only apply to acgme accredited fellowships after completing an acgme accredited residency. this would effectively cut off DO's from acgme fellowship training; the move makes DO residencies acgme accredited and maintains their ability to pursue fellowships.

 

[Dissected]

So I'm not sure if my view prior to this event was a misconception, and I was wondering if someone could clear it up for me. I thought that prior to this merger, the ACGME viewed DO's as "Independent Applicants" or some similar sounding name. This in effect gave MD the right to choose residencies first, then DO's second, then FMG/IMG third, etc. (Or maybe DO/IMG/FMG all second). Are DO's now no longer considered "independent applicants" since all their residencies will be ACGME accredited?

I think DO's will still be independent applicants. This doesn't change anything about school accreditation or the degree granted. It would be nice to have a breakdown of DO matching statistics in the NRMP publications, but we are lumped with FMG's and IMG's as independents so it's hard to know how similar applicants to us fare in the prior match cycles.

 

[K31]

So I'm not sure if my view prior to this event was a misconception, and I was wondering if someone could clear it up for me. I thought that prior to this merger, the ACGME viewed DO's as "Independent Applicants" or some similar sounding name. This in effect gave MD the right to choose residencies first, then DO's second, then FMG/IMG third, etc. (Or maybe DO/IMG/FMG all second). Are DO's now no longer considered "independent applicants" since all their residencies will be ACGME accredited?

That's not how the NRMP works. Everyone in the ACGME match goes through the same process and are equal as far as the NRMP is concerned. It's the preferences of programs that makes it harder for DOs and IMGs.

 

[Dissected]

That's not how the NRMP works. Everyone in the ACGME match goes through the same process and are equal as far as the NRMP is concerned. It's the preferences of programs that makes it harder for DOs and IMGs.

In the NRMP statistical reports DO/FMG/IMG are often lumped together as 'independent applicants' as opposed to USMD applicants. I think this is what he is referring to.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

In the NRMP statistical reports DO/FMG/IMG are often lumped together as 'independent applicants' as opposed to USMD applicants. I think this is what he is referring to.

I think they probably will be counted as US Seniors in the statistics reports soon.

 

[Dissected]

I think they probably will be counted as US Seniors in the statistics reports soon.

I guess it will be interesting to see..ideally they would be categorized separately, that would provide a lot more useful information.

 

[babdoc]

This is a complete aside, but I'm going to throw it out there anyway. I'm pretty sure that this is only big news on the DO side while no one on the MD side really cares. The MD 4th years I have met (as a DO student) at ACGME residency interviews 1. don't know about this or 2. don't care. Most people respond to the MD/DO discussion by asking "What's the difference? Isn't there something about 'laying on of the hands' or something?" Truthfully, most of them don't pay that much attention to the, so called, plight of the DOs.

As of right now, I don't see this merger changing much of anything other than making the same requirements for GME accreditation and maybe offering a single match. The latter is the biggest improvement for us DOs because we could apply to both MD and DO programs in one match. With the current system of DO match before the MD match, you lose the potential of an MD residency if you match in the DO match. If they're held at the same time, you don't have to decide to 1. risk the commitment of the DO match or 2. put all of your eggs in the ACGME basket.

 

[HalfListic]

This is a complete aside, but I'm going to throw it out there anyway. I'm pretty sure that this is only big news on the DO side while no one on the MD side really cares. The MD 4th years I have met (as a DO student) at ACGME residency interviews 1. don't know about this or 2. don't care. Most people respond to the MD/DO discussion by asking "What's the difference? Isn't there something about 'laying on of the hands' or something?" Truthfully, most of them don't pay that much attention to the, so called, plight of the DOs.

As of right now, I don't see this merger changing much of anything other than making the same requirements for GME accreditation and maybe offering a single match. The latter is the biggest improvement for us DOs because we could apply to both MD and DO programs in one match. With the current system of DO match before the MD match, you lose the potential of an MD residency if you match in the DO match. If they're held at the same time, you don't have to decide to 1. risk the commitment of the DO match or 2. put all of your eggs in the ACGME basket.

They shouldn't care...it doesn't affect them at all. The combined match doesn't start until 2015. (but Im sure most MD students do know about it as anyone knows the general news of their field, which this is) All my MD friends know about it, as well as my father who is in heath care administration.

But yeah, it will be great to not have to worry about two separate matches and the headache that comes from mis timed rankings etc.

 

[TriagePreMed]

This is a complete aside, but I'm going to throw it out there anyway. I'm pretty sure that this is only big news on the DO side while no one on the MD side really cares. The MD 4th years I have met (as a DO student) at ACGME residency interviews 1. don't know about this or 2. don't care. Most people respond to the MD/DO discussion by asking "What's the difference? Isn't there something about 'laying on of the hands' or something?" Truthfully, most of them don't pay that much attention to the, so called, plight of the DOs.

As of right now, I don't see this merger changing much of anything other than making the same requirements for GME accreditation and maybe offering a single match. The latter is the biggest improvement for us DOs because we could apply to both MD and DO programs in one match. With the current system of DO match before the MD match, you lose the potential of an MD residency if you match in the DO match. If they're held at the same time, you don't have to decide to 1. risk the commitment of the DO match or 2. put all of your eggs in the ACGME basket.

It changes a lot of if you think about. 1) Better residencies as quality will be upheld, 2) International recognition due to ACGME training, 3) No more problems with states requiring 1 year osteopathic internship and 4) (like you said) one single match.

 

[DrBumblebee]

It changes a lot of if you think about. 1) Better residencies as quality will be upheld, 2) International recognition due to ACGME training, 3) No more problems with states requiring 1 year osteopathic internship and 4) (like you said) one single match.

+1 👍

 

[NurWollen]

it changes a lot of if you think about. 1) better residencies as quality will be upheld, 2) international recognition due to acgme training, 3) no more problems with states requiring 1 year osteopathic internship and 4) (like you said) one single match.

+1 👍

+2

 

[Mosonik]

It changes a lot of if you think about. 1) Better residencies as quality will be upheld, 2) International recognition due to ACGME training, 3) No more problems with states requiring 1 year osteopathic internship and 4) (like you said) one single match.

#2 may not be totally accurate. First, I'm not sure what ACGME residency training has to do with international recognition (which I assume is referring to practice rights). There are slight differences in international "legal" rights of US trained MDs vs DOs but generally the gap is exaggerated and let's be honest, are your dreams going to be shattered if you can't start a private practice in Sweden? Okay enough of the sarcasm...

Also, with #3, I think it's important to realize there is no indication right now what will happen in the states that require the one year TRI's (Florida, Oklahoma, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and a few others) to be licensed by a DO Board. In other words, this is still being discussed and while it may mean no more problems these states have not agreed with that as of yet. This is taken straight from an AACOM FAQ publication and addresses this topic:

"This will be determined in discussions with ACGME, but it is certainly possible that the Residency Review Committee that oversees transitional year programs will also be responsible for current AOA accredited internships. However, some state licensing boards may choose to do away with the internship requirement if discussions are successful on the unified accreditation system. Transitional year programs that remain may become preliminary year programs."


You make good points Triage, I just wanted to clarify where the facts currently stand.

 

[zoner]

So what is the consensus on here regarding DO's ability to match into a competitive ACGME residency after the merger?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using SDN Mobile

 

[sylvanthus]

No or minimal difference. Preferences will still exist.

 

[MedPR]

no or minimal difference. Preferences will still exist.

+1.

 

[zoner]

But the consensus is that mds will benefit by being able to match into competitve aoa residency?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using SDN Mobile

 

[Frostmoon]

But the consensus is that mds will benefit by being able to match into competitve aoa residency?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using SDN Mobile

well, after spending an hour of my Sunday afternoon reading all these posts, it seems that

1. Yes, the MDs will benefit by being able to match into AOA residency, given that they are willing to spend extra time studying OMM.
2. DOs will face less discrimination in the future
3. A greater number of them will also be able to match into MD residency.

To be honest, I think this is quite a good news for DOs, at least it's not a bad one. A great number of doors have opened for us, and in the long run, people will show us more respect.
Yes, there will be competition. But if you are really determined to be a surgeon, u won't mind studying extra hours to gain the valuable chance of getting into more prestigious residency programs.

 

[sylvanthus]

well, after spending an hour of my Sunday afternoon reading all these posts, it seems that

1. Yes, the MDs will benefit by being able to match into AOA residency, given that they are willing to spend extra time studying OMM.
2. DOs will face less discrimination in the future
3. A greater number of them will also be able to match into MD residency.

To be honest, I think this is quite a good news for DOs, at least it's not a bad one. A great number of doors have opened for us, and in the long run, people will show us more respect.
Yes, there will be competition. But if you are really determined to be a surgeon, u won't mind studying extra hours to gain the valuable chance of getting into more prestigious residency programs.

No more doors have opened than were open before. We have always been able to match ACGME.

 

[SpecterGT260]

No more doors have opened than were open before. We have always been able to match ACGME.

yeah... I am not really sure where the pre-meds keep getting that except potentially pulled straight from their rears to satisfy some starry-eyed hopefulness. 😕

 

[HockeyDr09]

#2 may not be totally accurate. First, I'm not sure what ACGME residency training has to do with international recognition (which I assume is referring to practice rights). There are slight differences in international "legal" rights of US trained MDs vs DOs but generally the gap is exaggerated and let's be honest, are your dreams going to be shattered if you can't start a private practice in Sweden? Okay enough of the sarcasm...

Also, with #3, I think it's important to realize there is no indication right now what will happen in the states that require the one year TRI's (Florida, Oklahoma, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and a few others) to be licensed by a DO Board. In other words, this is still being discussed and while it may mean no more problems these states have not agreed with that as of yet. This is taken straight from an AACOM FAQ publication and addresses this topic:

"This will be determined in discussions with ACGME, but it is certainly possible that the Residency Review Committee that oversees transitional year programs will also be responsible for current AOA accredited internships. However, some state licensing boards may choose to do away with the internship requirement if discussions are successful on the unified accreditation system. Transitional year programs that remain may become preliminary year programs."


You make good points Triage, I just wanted to clarify where the facts currently stand.

#2 is accurate. There are countries that allow physicians to practice if have gone through an ACGME residency and licensing system. Now ALL residencies are ACGME. (This was stated by the head of AACOM).

#3 is accurate. Resolution 42 is as good as gone. It's been stated by the AACOM head and an AOA representative. If all residencies are under the same umbrella it would be nearly impossible to enforce.

Triage was on the mark.

Also these changes will make it significantly easier for a DO to be on staff at an ACGME residency program. Previously there were many hoops to jump through. This should no longer be the case if everything is ACGME.

I'm still in shock with how there are people stating this doesn't change anything. We've already posted 6 significant changes. I wouldn't be surprised if there were more to come.

 

[Mosonik]

well, after spending an hour of my Sunday afternoon reading all these posts, it seems that

1. Yes, the MDs will benefit by being able to match into AOA residency, given that they are willing to spend extra time studying OMM.
2. DOs will face less discrimination in the future
3. A greater number of them will also be able to match into MD residency.

To be honest, I think this is quite a good news for DOs, at least it's not a bad one. A great number of doors have opened for us, and in the long run, people will show us more respect.
Yes, there will be competition. But if you are really determined to be a surgeon, u won't mind studying extra hours to gain the valuable chance of getting into more prestigious residency programs.

Exactly right.
We can debate the consequences all day but the truth is no one knows what this going to mean in the short term. What we do know is we are entering osteopathic medicine at a very different time from many of those who came before us. Bias may still exist but the fact we even have the opportunity to pursue equal post-grad opportunities indicates the change that has taken place in the last few decades. The long term consequences are likely to follow suit with all other things... as people are less able to remember the specifics of why there was historical animosity, bias will disappear. Time heals all wounds😉

 

[HockeyDr09]

It changes a lot of if you think about. 1) Better residencies as quality will be upheld, 2) International recognition due to ACGME training, 3) No more problems with states requiring 1 year osteopathic internship and 4) (like you said) one single match. + Easier job being on staff as a DO at an ACGME program.

No more doors have opened than were open before. We have always been able to match ACGME.

yeah... I am not really sure where the pre-meds keep getting that except potentially pulled straight from their rears to satisfy some starry-eyed hopefulness. 😕

Yeah.... nothing has changed 🙄

 

[sylvanthus]

Yeah.... nothing has changed 🙄

1) is speculation (some AOA requirements were more strict than ACGME, per program directors)
2) is pointless (seriously how many of us really are going to move to another country to practice?)
3) speculation and not guaranteed whatsoever ("will be discussed")
4) one single match is cool but again doesn't "open doors" that weren't open before

 

[SpecterGT260]

Yeah.... nothing has changed 🙄

Not much. The major "change" is that DOs aren't being kicked out all together. Woohoo 🙄 confetti and such

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[HockeyDr09]

1) is speculation (some AOA requirements were more strict than ACGME, per program directors)
2) is pointless (seriously how many of us really are going to move to another country to practice?)
3) speculation and not guaranteed whatsoever ("will be discussed")
4) one single match is cool but again doesn't "open doors" that weren't open before

Not much. The major "change" is that DOs aren't being kicked out all together. Woohoo 🙄 confetti and such

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

I'll respect your opinions on the matter. For me personally, having a single match list, not having to do an AOA rotating internship if I want to live in PA, MI, FL, and having a significantly easier time being on staff of an ACGME residency program is a VERY significant change. One of you is a 4th year, this means nothing to you, we get it. The other is an M.D student, this means nothing to you, we get it.

Some of us here are the class of 2015 and later. This DOES mean something for us.

 

[SpecterGT260]

I'll respect your opinions on the matter. For me personally, having a single match list, not having to do an AOA rotating internship if I want to live in PA, MI, FL, and having a significantly easier time being on staff of an ACGME residency program is a VERY significant change. One of you is a 4th year, this means nothing to you, we get it. The other is an M.D student, this means nothing to you, we get it.

Some of us here are the class of 2015 and later. This DOES mean something for us.

it will be more convenient. Don't mistake that to mean easier or that it somehow translates into broader acceptance by ACGME programs of DO students. There is simply no rationale that defends that conclusion.

 

[HockeyDr09]

it will be more convenient. Don't mistake that to mean easier or that it somehow translates into broader acceptance by ACGME programs of DO students. There is simply no rationale that defends that conclusion.

I appreciate you finally admitting this. It means a lot to me.

Also, "there is simply no rationale that defends" the conclusion that ACGME programs will definitively not accept more D.O's because of these new combined accreditation standards.

Time will tell...

 

[SpecterGT260]

I appreciate you finally admitting this. It means a lot to me.

I don't think I have ever not admitted this. I have only objected to the notions that it will be a "whole new world for the DO where birds are singing and and children play and giggle off in the distance. The sun shines warmly on the faces of every DO as they perform OMM mime-style and ACGME PDs suddenly see the error of their ways and decide to turn the tides and start rejecting MD students" 🙄
This is a not-so stretched parody of things that some posters on this forum have said. It is projected wishful thinking at best. The ACGME still has the AOA by the balls in all of this and there may very well be further developments by 2015. For now, the class of 2015 will get 1 match which will remove some stress but otherwise not drastically impact where students are going. Queue confetti 🙂

 

[SpecterGT260]

Also, "there is simply no rationale that defends" the conclusion that ACGME programs will definitively not accept more D.O's because of these new combined accreditation standards.

Time will tell...

see... thats ridiculous.

There IS rationale.

The PDs that were will be the PDs that still are. There is no mandate saying they have to accept anyone in a different manner than they did before. There is no incentive to do so. The bias that existed will continue to do so. It is reasonable and rational to assume the status quo will persist when there is no evidence that happenings will directly affect it.
There you go, 1 rationale, made to order, easy on the mayo and hold the bull**** 🙂

 

[HockeyDr09]

I don't think I have ever not admitted this. I have only objected to the notions that it will be a "whole new world for the DO where birds are singing and and children play and giggle off in the distance. The sun shines warmly on the faces of every DO as they perform OMM mime-style and ACGME PDs suddenly see the error of their ways and decide to turn the tides and start rejecting MD students" 🙄
This is a not-so stretched parody of things that some posters on this forum have said. It is projected wishful thinking at best. The ACGME still has the AOA by the balls in all of this and there may very well be further developments by 2015. For now, the class of 2015 will get 1 match which will remove some stress but otherwise not drastically impact where students are going. Queue confetti 🙂

Just a point, when you quote a phrase, usually someone had to have actually stated the quote.🙄

All I've stated is that things are changing, which you've admitted to yourself. That's all I was really looking for. Yes, I know there is discrimination against DO's at ACGME programs. I've NEVER said otherwise. No it's not going to get better over night, and the discrimination is not going to get better any time in the absolute near future.

I can say (for probably the 5th time now) that the changes that will be put into place (a combined match / eliminating Res 42 / definitely going to be ACGME certified / preserved access to ACGME fellowships / easier time becoming staff at an ACGME program (I like to teach) ARE steps in the right direction. Neither you, nor anyone else can accurately refute these points. Whether you like it or not these are GOOD changes for DO students, and to us these changes mean a lot more than you make them out to be.