MD, DO designation...makes sense to me?

[thesauce]

Why not just keep it DO?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dr.Inviz]

Why not just keep it DO?

I agree. MD/DO or DO/MD is unprofessional. Either be a separate DO group or unite with the MDs if there is that much insecurity behind it all over the initials. OR .. go Caribe.

This thread is comical.

 

[Navicular]

Not only that, but all my friends moms that tell my other friend's moms that I'm in MD school specializing in Chiropratics would end!! I think more people would realize that we are ACTUAL MEDICAL DOCTORS plus a little extra!

A D.O. does not have "a little extra!" without taking content out of somewhere else. It is highly unlikely that students at D.O. schools work harder and are trained better than their M.D. counterparts. The AOA needs to wake up and realize that D.O. schools are primarily a back door to allopathic residencies. If you guys are so gung ho about osteopathy then why do so many of apply to allopathic residencies?

 

[thesauce]

Absolutely not illegal. Unethical, maybe. I know personally of several people who have "MD" on their badge or white coat, when in reality they are a DO. It is a misrepresentation, but since there is no functional difference between a DO and an MD (in the state's eyes), it is a moot point.

This is absolutely false. It's fabrication of credentials, pure and simple, and that's illegal. You could get your pants sued off for it. Some people, regardless of how the state feels, would still prefer to go to an MD over a DO or the other way around, so they have been lied to if a doctor advertises himself as something he's not.

Not too long ago, I heard about DO Ophthomologists and DO Orthopods saying that the DO on their coats stood for Doctor of Ophtho or Ortho, that too is illegal and could also lead to a lawsuit.

 

[thanecyan]

My only concern for DO is international practicing rights.

 

[Idiopathic]

A D.O. does not have "a little extra!" without taking content out of somewhere else. It is highly unlikely that students at D.O. schools work harder and are trained better than their M.D. counterparts. The AOA needs to wake up and realize that D.O. schools are primarily a back door to allopathic residencies. If you guys are so gung ho about osteopathy then why do so many of apply to allopathic residencies?

No better, but equal. Thats all we're looking for 😉

Many of them do that because of the relative lack of quality residency programs on the DO side. That is more a function of postgraduate failures than of medical school issues.

Changing the designation is not a positive thing. If you arent at least ready to explain your degree, you shouldnt get it. Be a DO or be an MD, and be ready to explain your degree without the implication that you learn or do more than an MD, because that gets old and is fairly tired. Our training is somewhat different, I agree, and I cant say its more or less, as my sample size of medical degrees is n=1.

However, I take exception with the fact that you all dont seem to think that a DO can learn everything an MD does "and more". As if the MD schools (your school in particular) teaches absolutely the maximum amount of medicine possible, and there is only a finite amount of learning one can do.

We should compare things MDs learn that DOs dont know versus things DOs learn that MDs dont know 😉 Now that I think about it, we probably do learn more. Whether or not it is all useful is a different story.

 

[Idiopathic]

This is absolutely false. It's fabrication of credentials, pure and simple, and that's illegal. You could get your pants sued off for it. Some people, regardless of how the state feels, would still prefer to go to an MD over a DO or the other way around, so they have been lied to if a doctor advertises himself as something he's not.

Not too long ago, I heard about DO Ophthomologists and DO Orthopods saying that the DO on their coats stood for Doctor of Ophtho or Ortho, that too is illegal and could also lead to a lawsuit.

First off, anything could lead to a lawsuit, which has absolutely no bearing on the legality (i.e. criminality) of the issue. I could sue you for that post, it wouldnt make it illegal (and it wouldnt mean I would win).

Second, its not true. Someone's white coat does not qualify as their "credentials", their medical license does. If I were to represent myself (i.e. Hi, Im Dr. Idiopathic, board-certified MD in blah-blah-blah), then yes, that might be dicey. But considering all doctors are equal in the eyes of the state, there's no criminality issue.

 

[HumbleMD]

No better, but equal. Thats all we're looking for 😉

Many of them do that because of the relative lack of quality residency programs on the DO side. That is more a function of postgraduate failures than of medical school issues.

Changing the designation is not a positive thing. If you arent at least ready to explain your degree, you shouldnt get it. Be a DO or be an MD, and be ready to explain your degree without the implication that you learn or do more than an MD, because that gets old and is fairly tired. Our training is somewhat different, I agree, and I cant say its more or less, as my sample size of medical degrees is n=1.

However, I take exception with the fact that you all dont seem to think that a DO can learn everything an MD does "and more". As if the MD schools (your school in particular) teaches absolutely the maximum amount of medicine possible, and there is only a finite amount of learning one can do.

We should compare things MDs learn that DOs dont know versus things DOs learn that MDs dont know 😉 Now that I think about it, we probably do learn more. Whether or not it is all useful is a different story.

That's a fairly pompous statement for your n=1 sample size, especially considering that you just stated you want to push for equality rather than asserting D.O. is better. That's also a pretty radical statement considering most M.D. programs are filled with students with a higher demonstrated scholastic aptitude (didn't say better doctors, but definitely higher scholastic apptitude, measured in GPA and MCAT).

And going on this line of reasoning, if a D.O. is so much better, I would echo the question of why they're constantly trying to get into M.D. hospitals and residencies, and why, as in this thread, there's an attempt to get the "lesser, easier, and less work-intensive" M.D. designation, left for people who believe they are finite beings with finite capabilities (I'll call God for you Idiopathic, and tell him you want your name back).

Ugh, the only thing worse than self-aggrandization is undue self-aggrandizing. At least be from Harvard (I forgot, is that M.D. or D.O.?) if you're going to make statements like that.

 

[Navicular]

Watch it HumbleMD... you might get put on probation again for saying anything that is anti-D.O. and pro-M.D.....

 

[Nickelpennykid]

Too few seats. If every DO wanted to do an osteopathic residency, there would not be enough seats to accomodate them so some have to do allo. I, for one, would like to do an osteopathic surgical residency.

A D.O. does not have "a little extra!" without taking content out of somewhere else. It is highly unlikely that students at D.O. schools work harder and are trained better than their M.D. counterparts. The AOA needs to wake up and realize that D.O. schools are primarily a back door to allopathic residencies. If you guys are so gung ho about osteopathy then why do so many of apply to allopathic residencies?

 

[Haemulon]

If you want to go DO and are successful, then you should be proud of your DO degree. If you want to go MD, then be proud of that degree. I am certainly going to be proud to display my credentials. So what is the problem? Why try to change it into something else? It is what it is. It seems like only DO's seem to be concerned with this though, am I wrong?

 

[Navicular]

If you want to go DO and are successful, then you should be proud of your DO degree. If you want to go MD, then be proud of that degree. I am certainly going to be proud to display my credentials. So what is the problem? Why try to change it into something else? It is what it is. It seems like only DO's seem to be concerned with this though, am I wrong?

I have a feeling that the D.O.s that want to get the degree changed are the same D.O.s that are only persuing the D.O. degree because applying into something else didn't work out. What that something else is is probably the same thing that HumbleMD alluded to earlier in this thread... 😉

 

[JayneCobb]

If you want to go DO and are successful, then you should be proud of your DO degree. If you want to go MD, then be proud of that degree. I am certainly going to be proud to display my credentials. So what is the problem? Why try to change it into something else? It is what it is. It seems like only DO's seem to be concerned with this though, am I wrong?

I agree. I'm a DO and have no problems with it. And what these people who advocate changing the DO title fail to realize is, that they are only contributing to the stereotype that DOs are in some way inferior to the MD counterparts. and worse, they are weakening the profession by running off and not looking back because of their inferiority complex.

the only way that we as DOs will improve is to have those who go to strong Allo programs to come back and push our programs to the level of excellence they should be. And then it's up to us as students, interns, residents to push our profession and programs to new levels. You can become adequate docs with the typical service based residency, but without the didactic portion and having someone pointing out your knowledge inadequacies and your weak points in your abilities, you and I will never be the physicians we should be. And it's going to take a full blown renaissance from the AOA down to the students to change the status quo.

If you want equality, then be equals and start acting like you deserve it. I did not take this road because it was the easiest, I took it because I thought the osteopathic programs was 10 times better than the state allo program.

 

[toothless rufus]

You can become adequate docs with the typical service based residency, but without the didactic portion and having someone pointing out your knowledge inadequacies and your weak points in your abilities, you and I will never be the physicians we should be.

These things are really not readily found in DO residencies? Especially the didactic portion? What is the teaching model made up of then? Why did they choose to not include these aspects in the training?

 

[JayneCobb]

These things are really not readily found in DO residencies? Especially the didactic portion? What is the teaching model made up of then? Why did they choose to not include these aspects in the training?

Poor wording on my part. All programs have a required didactics portion, but many programs which I've seen are heavily resident ran and many IM programs do not have reading clubs and a few other things that they should have. and worse to me is that the attendings don't push the residents at many places to learn more than what they see on service. but on the same foot, I've been to several dually accredited programs who started out as Allo programs who were the same way or worse. There are many programs who still cling to the old model that you will become a good physician if you can see as man pts as possible during residency. I for one do not hold to this theory. This model will make you good at what you're use to seeing, but if you don't know about the zebras, then you'll never look for them.

 

[thesauce]

First off, anything could lead to a lawsuit, which has absolutely no bearing on the legality (i.e. criminality) of the issue. I could sue you for that post, it wouldnt make it illegal (and it wouldnt mean I would win).

Second, its not true. Someone's white coat does not qualify as their "credentials", their medical license does. If I were to represent myself (i.e. Hi, Im Dr. Idiopathic, board-certified MD in blah-blah-blah), then yes, that might be dicey. But considering all doctors are equal in the eyes of the state, there's no criminality issue.

I think we're all aware that you can sue for anything if you fill out the paperwork. The fact is, you can sue a DO posing as an MD (even if it's just on his coat) and WIN...easily, because it IS illegal to fabricate credentials. Someone's white coat may not be their official credentials, but it certainly represents them. Go ahead and walk down mainstreet in a police uniform and see how far you get before you're arrested for impersonating a police officer, regardless of whether you actually SAY you're a police officer. Your garment counts just as much as anything else.

This is no different than me writing Harvard Medical School on my White Coat. Even though in the state's eyes, an MD is an MD, some patients would rather go to an Ivy League doctor (call it Narcissism or whatever you will) so they would sue and win. It's pretty clear-cut.

But hey, when all you DOs get out of residency, put on a coat that says you're an MD and set up shop under the title of MD (because a business sign doesn't qualify as your credentials either, right?) and let me know how it goes.

 

[toothless rufus]

Poor wording on my part. All programs have a required didactics portion, but many programs which I've seen are heavily resident ran and many IM programs do not have reading clubs and a few other things that they should have. and worse to me is that the attendings don't push the residents at many places to learn more than what they see on service. but on the same foot, I've been to several dually accredited programs who started out as Allo programs who were the same way or worse. There are many programs who still cling to the old model that you will become a good physician if you can see as man pts as possible during residency. I for one do not hold to this theory. This model will make you good at what you're use to seeing, but if you don't know about the zebras, then you'll never look for them.

Thanks for the clarification!

 

[JasonUD]

And what these people who advocate changing the DO title fail to realize is, that they are only contributing to the stereotype that DOs are in some way inferior to the MD counterparts. and worse, they are weakening the profession by running off and not looking back because of their inferiority complex.

I disagree. I'm a DO student and am very proud of it and am sure to tell everyone I can the differences between an MD and a DO. I applied to only DO schools because I believe in OMM. I do not think that posting on an internet message board about the idea of changing the degree title adds to the stereotype nor does it show an inferiority complex, it is simple an anonymous conversation about prospective change. Yes, there are students in my class who are only there because they couldn't make it onto the MD route, but it is a SMALL minority, and within this small minority only some of them have the so called 'inferiority complex'. As I stated in my earlier post, attaching MD somewhere to the DO initials, in my opinion, would cause more conversation to be had between patients and doctors over the differences. I'm proud with having DO after my name, and I believe that the majority of the posters on this thread are as well. This is only a discussion toying around the idea of change.

 

[Dr.Inviz]

Watch it HumbleMD... you might get put on probation again for saying anything that is anti-D.O. and pro-M.D.....

been there, done that. ...

 

[thesauce]

Yes, there are students in my class who are only there because they couldn't make it onto the MD route, but it is a SMALL minority,

If this is true, then why are the DO admission stats so low?

Either the DO adcoms are are intentionally picking students with lower stats (how much sense does that make?) or Pre-meds with lower stats just happen to like the DO philosophy better.

 

[WALKE219]

If this is true, then why are the DO admission stats so low?

Either the DO adcoms are are intentionally picking students with lower stats (how much sense does that make?) or Pre-meds with lower stats just happen to like the DO philosophy better.

I dont think it is either. I think that there are those people who "choose" DO because of lack of MD acceptances. I do believe that at many DO schools, reliance on MCAT and GPA statistics are less. I was accepted into both allopathic and osteopathic schools and I chose osteopathic for the school. Also, you have to remember that many people do get into both allopthic and osteopathic schools. Many choose to attend the allopathic school. Their choice. This makes way for students with lower "stats" to attend.

I think we would find that if you made these osteopathic schools allopathic schools the overall statistics for medical school admission would lower. This is simply due to the fact that there are more positions avaliable, and every school would be forced to lower their "qualifications" at the risk of not filling their class.

I think only pre-meds say that because osteo schools may have lower stats that they are of lesser quality. For that matter, MSUCOM's admissions statistics are comparable to MANY allopathic schools.

 

[Haemulon]

I disagree. I'm a DO student and am very proud of it and am sure to tell everyone I can the differences between an MD and a DO. I applied to only DO schools because I believe in OMM. I do not think that posting on an internet message board about the idea of changing the degree title adds to the stereotype nor does it show an inferiority complex, it is simple an anonymous conversation about prospective change. Yes, there are students in my class who are only there because they couldn't make it onto the MD route, but it is a SMALL minority, and within this small minority only some of them have the so called 'inferiority complex'. As I stated in my earlier post, attaching MD somewhere to the DO initials, in my opinion, would cause more conversation to be had between patients and doctors over the differences. I'm proud with having DO after my name, and I believe that the majority of the posters on this thread are as well. This is only a discussion toying around the idea of change.

Well, why not just change DO to MD then. Then, you can have an additional set of initials designating a certification in OMM (probably would need to do some formal training program with an exam and such, kinda like lab techs). Then all medical schools would be the same (except for their minor differences in curriculum) and people who wanted to learn OMM would get professional recognition for that beyond the medical doctorate. For instance, we could have the designation "COMM" or something (meaning Certifiied in OMM). Therefore, your title would read John Doe, MD, COMM.

 

[WALKE219]

My opinion :

Either start the petition to get it done, or quit talking about it because it is never going to happen.

These types of threads always seem to be started by pre-meds who are going to osteopathic schools only because they couldn't get into allopathic schools. They seem to have some hope that by the time they graduate they can change their degree to MD in order to crush that little voice in their head telling them they are not good enough.
NO ONE in the professional world cares if you are an MD or a DO. Be happy you are going to be a physician. Do your job, make your money and one day you won't care what some 21 yr old thinks of you 😉

 

[WALKE219]

Well, why not just change DO to MD then. Then, you can have an additional set of initials designating a certification in OMM (probably would need to do some formal training program with an exam and such, kinda like lab techs). Then all medical schools would be the same (except for their individuals differences in curriculum) and people who wanted to learn OMM would get professional recognition for that beyond the medical doctorate. For intance, we could have the designation "COMM" or something (meaning Certifiied in OMM). Therefore, your title would read John Doe, MD, COMM.

Why not change MD to DO then and force all allopathic schools to have OMM instruction?

It is because the majority of people in osteo schools love their training, their degree and their job. Likewise with MDs.

 

[koshka]

My opinion :

Either start the petition to get it done, or quit talking about it because it is never going to happen.

These types of threads always seem to be started by pre-meds who are going to osteopathic schools only because they couldn't get into allopathic schools. They seem to have some hope that by the time they graduate they can change their degree to MD in order to crush that little voice in their head telling them they are not good enough.
NO ONE in the professional world cares if you are an MD or a DO. Be happy you are going to be a physician. Do your job, make your money and one day you won't care what some 21 yr old thinks of you 😉

Absolutely agree...But I think it's a little sad that a lot of the people making these arguments are not "traditional 21-year old" pre-meds

 

[OHMAN0125]

MD/DO, MDO, OMD degree? Sounds so ******ed. Makes you sound like MD wannabe. Please dont do that. Just work hard and show that you can kick any MD's a$$ in medicine. 👍

 

[Haemulon]

Why not change MD to DO then and force all allopathic schools to have OMM instruction?

It is because the majority of people in osteo schools love their training, their degree and their job. Likewise with MDs.

I agree with your second comment, that most people love/prefer their own style of training.

However, the reasons not to change an MD to DO and force MD's to learn OMM are:
1.) MD's/prospective MD's are not the groups typically complaining about their title.
2.) The vast majority of physicians are MD's, not DO's.
3.) OMM is not a fully proven and embraced practice (more so for some applications than others) and is not accepted by the majority of allopathic institutions (therefore the majority of all medical training institutions). I say this while still acknowledging the tenacity with which many DO's defend the practice.

For what it's worth, I have no problem with keeping it the way it is. Like I said earlier, everyone should be proud of their own training and not try to make it seem like something different. I fully believe that DO's can practice just the same as MD's. But some individuals seem to want to have it both ways. On the one hand emphasizing that the training is the same, and then turning around and emphasizing that the two are completely different. If they really are the same, then why is there a need for 2 different degrees? If they really are different, then why not be proud of the differences and embrace the diffrent designations?

 

[Nickelpennykid]

There are a few things that need to be addressed. First of all, there should be no change in the DO initials. If you are too insecure to not have your MD or some redicilious hybrid (MD/DO or MDO) then go to the carib or get your stats up and reapply. I am very happy to be going to PCOM and I do not want to spend four years listening to people complaining about their degree. Making up new letters is not going to change a thing, osteopathic medicine will always be osteopathic medicine.

People are making the stats difference into such a big deal. Take a look at the MCAT. We are talking about a point to a point and a half per section difference between allo/osteo averages. As for GPA, is there really a big difference between a 3.5 average and a 3.2 / 3.3 GPA? You are making this out to seem like osteopathic schools are taking anyone with a 98.6 degree temperature and a pulse. So let me get this straight, because as an undergrad some students were even 2 points better at figuring out the tension of a string suspended from a ceiling with a ball at the end translates into you becoming a better physician? Please get over yourself.

Yes, people do make a big deal about the "osteopathic philisiophy." Saying that DO's "look at the entire person" and use a "holistic approach" is implying that MD's don't do that and it is insulting. However, there are some subtle elements of osteopathic medicine that do make it a little different, such as OMM, which has some advantages or at least some alternative to allopathic medicine. Not better or worse, simply different. I have said this in most of my DO interviews and even in my sole MD interview and no one fell over dead when I said both disciplines are capable of looking at the entire person and this *gasp* might to be unique to osteopathic medicine. I like OMM and look forward to learning it and if I go into Family Practice I will probably use it.

Bottom line, if you are going to be uncomfortable with the fact that you are not going to be an MD, please, please don't go to an osteopathic school.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

3.) OMM is not a fully proven and embraced practice (more so for some applications than others) and is not accepted by the majority of allopathic institutions (therefore the majority of all medical training institutions). I say this while still acknowledging the tenacity with which many DO's defend the practice.

OMM, as it exists in the traditional sense, is well accepted. I think you are referring to cranial.

 

[Haemulon]

There are a few things that need to be addressed. First of all, there should be no change in the DO initials. If you are too insecure to not have your MD or some redicilious hybrid (MD/DO or MDO) then go to the carib or get your stats up and reapply. I am very happy to be going to PCOM and I do not want to spend four years listening to people complaining about their degree. Making up new letters is not going to change a thing, osteopathic medicine will always be osteopathic medicine.

People are making the stats difference into such a big deal. Take a look at the MCAT. We are talking about a point to a point and a half per section difference between allo/osteo averages. As for GPA, is there really a big difference between a 3.5 average and a 3.2 / 3.3 GPA? You are making this out to seem like osteopathic schools are taking anyone with a 98.6 degree temperature and a pulse. So let me get this straight, because as an undergrad some students were even 2 points better at figuring out the tension of a string suspended from a ceiling with a ball at the end translates into you becoming a better physician? Please get over yourself.

Yes, people do make a big deal about the “osteopathic philisiophy.” Saying that DO’s “look at the entire person” and use a “holistic approach” is implying that MD’s don’t do that and it is insulting. However, there are some subtle elements of osteopathic medicine that do make it a little different, such as OMM, which has some advantages or at least some alternative to allopathic medicine. Not better or worse, simply different. I have said this in most of my DO interviews and even in my sole MD interview and no one fell over dead when I said both disciplines are capable of looking at the entire person and this *gasp* might to be unique to osteopathic medicine. I like OMM and look forward to learning it and if I go into Family Practice I will probably use it.

Bottom line, if you are going to be uncomfortable with the fact that you are not going to be an MD, please, please don’t go to an osteopathic school.

This is a very good post. I definitely support this. 👍 👍

 

[Haemulon]

OMM, as it exists in the traditional sense, is well accepted. I think you are referring to cranial.

Well, your point is taken. I was actually thinking of cranial when I said "some applications moreso then others". If you mean by accepted that OMM is generally viewed as ok to practice and that many people believe that it is a very effective and usefull adjunct to mainstream medicine, then I agree. However, I would not go too far with this as one can consider chiropractic care, acupuncture, aromatherepy, and other alternative approaches to be "accepted" as well, at least by many health care consumers. Some applications of OMM have had objective effectiveness demonstrated to a higher degree than others. By no means have all practices of OMM been proven on the level of double blind controlled studies. Cranial is on the controversial extreme. On the other end I speculate that there are relatively uncontroversial techniques that may also utilized by allo practitioners, such as by allo PM&R physicians. There is a spectrum.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

Well, your point is taken. I was actually thinking of cranial when I said "some applications moreso then others". If you mean by accepted that OMM is generally viewed as ok to practice and that many people believe that it is a very effective and usefull adjunct to mainstream medicine, then I agree. However, I would not go to far with this as one can consider chiropractic care, acupuncture, aromatherepy, and other alternative approaches to be "accepted" as well, at least by many health care consumers. Some applications of OMM have had objective effectiveness demonstrated to a higher degree than others. By no means have all practices of OMM been proven on the level of double blind controlled studies. Cranial is on the controversial extreme. On the other end I am sure there are techniques also utilized by allo practitioners, such as allo PM&R physicians. There is a spectrum.

I agree with some of this but your are lumping some unrelated things into one group. Chiropractic Care is well accepted and recently, acupuncture has appeared in JAMA and mentioned in medical schools as a way to release endogenous opiates for an alternative method of pain management. While the mechanism is still unknown, it is accepted as an effective alt. treatment and has been proven as effective. Aromatherapy sounds made up haha

 

[GoodDoctor]

😍

As for GPA, is there really a big difference between a 3.5 average and a 3.2 / 3.3 GPA? You are making this out to seem like osteopathic schools are taking anyone with a 98.6 degree temperature and a pulse. So let me get this straight, because as an undergrad some students were even 2 points better at figuring out the tension of a string suspended from a ceiling with a ball at the end translates into you becoming a better physician? Please get over yourself.

I think another cause of lower GPA at DO schools is that DO schools are more forgiving of previous mistakes from years ago and pay more attention to upward trends. The ave. age of DO matriculants is several years higher than MD matriculants. A student who botched thier Freshman year, took time off, came back and pulled a 3.8+ for the next 3-4 years would end up with a 3.0-3.4 overall. A DO school would take this into account and be happy to accept this student, whereas allo schools may not be so forgiving.

 

[Haemulon]

I agree with some of this but your are lumping some unrelated things into one group. Chiropractic Care is well accepted and recently, acupuncture has appeared in JAMA and mentioned in medical schools as a way to release endogenous opiates for an alternative method of pain management. While the mechanism is still unknown, it is accepted as an effective alt. treatment and has been proven as effective. Aromatherapy sounds made up haha

I think we agree even more than it first appears. Chiropractic care has many highly controversial applications. There is not a consistent uniformity to the profession/training. For instance, I have known chiropracters that thought they could mediate physiological disease process through the manipulation of spinal vertebrae. This is certainly no way to treat diabetes, for instance. There are also cases reported of chiropracters working on brand new infants, which scares me significantly. Like in any profession, there are fanatics out there and the original basis of chiropractic suggests a number of things that just arn't true. Can it be usefull for a number of musculoskeletal problems? Absolutely. I support its use for the proper applications. But since chiropractors are no longer required to provide radiographic evidence of "subluxations" prior to offering or performing treatment (for reimbursement from insurance companies), it allows for a considerable question of outright fraud in some cases.

Accupuncture, likewise, does have a number of valid and proven applications. But the usefullness of the actual technique in some instances does not mean an acceptance that there indeed is a chi flowing through ones body that can be manipulated to cure diease and effect healing. See my point? Sure, its great for some applications of pain management, but it still doesn't mean that the original tenents of accupuncture are true. Its the blurring of understanding for the public that makes me uncomfortable.

 

[thesauce]

I dont think it is either. I think that there are those people who "choose" DO because of lack of MD acceptances. I do believe that at many DO schools, reliance on MCAT and GPA statistics are less. I was accepted into both allopathic and osteopathic schools and I chose osteopathic for the school. Also, you have to remember that many people do get into both allopthic and osteopathic schools. Many choose to attend the allopathic school. Their choice. This makes way for students with lower "stats" to attend.

I think we would find that if you made these osteopathic schools allopathic schools the overall statistics for medical school admission would lower. This is simply due to the fact that there are more positions avaliable, and every school would be forced to lower their "qualifications" at the risk of not filling their class.

I think only pre-meds say that because osteo schools may have lower stats that they are of lesser quality. For that matter, MSUCOM's admissions statistics are comparable to MANY allopathic schools.[/QUOTE]

If students who had higher stats were offsetting the students with lower credentials, the average entrance stats would be the same as an allopathic school. BUT THEY AREN'T! Nope, in reality, the class as a whole has lower stats, meaning that there are far more in the class with lower statistics.

And as for the last bolded comment: give me a break! Right off the MSUCOM website: "MCAT: the average for each entering class has ranged from 26 to 27. Here the range is somewhat narrower than the GPA review." The latter sentence rules out the possibility of a few students with really bad credentials lowering the stats of the class as a whole. Name me a single allopathic medical school, besides maybe the bottom 10, that have admissions criteria this low.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

😍
I think another cause of lower GPA at DO schools is that DO schools are more forgiving of previous mistakes from years ago and pay more attention to upward trends. The ave. age of DO matriculants is several years higher than MD matriculants. A student who botched thier Freshman year, took time off, came back and pulled a 3.8+ for the next 3-4 years would end up with a 3.0-3.4 overall. A DO school would take this into account and be happy to accept this student, whereas allo schools may not be so forgiving.

It’s not a matter of being forgiving…it is a matter of the best available applicants. In general both MD and DO schools will take the students with higher stats. There are exceptions with LOR’s and volunteer experiences, but assuming these variables to be equal a DO school is still going to take a student with the best available stats. Now, as we said with the grade differences, DO schools may have candidates with slightly lower stats, but they still take the best available. It is also likely that some of these accepted students had rough starts to their college careers. Allo schools might not have to be "forgiving" of a non-trad with low ugrad stats because they have a wider pool to select from. Again, none of this has anything to do with forgiving, nor does it imply that higher stats yield better doctors.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

I dont think it is either. I think that there are those people who "choose" DO because of lack of MD acceptances. I do believe that at many DO schools, reliance on MCAT and GPA statistics are less. I was accepted into both allopathic and osteopathic schools and I chose osteopathic for the school. Also, you have to remember that many people do get into both allopthic and osteopathic schools. Many choose to attend the allopathic school. Their choice. This makes way for students with lower "stats" to attend.

I think we would find that if you made these osteopathic schools allopathic schools the overall statistics for medical school admission would lower. This is simply due to the fact that there are more positions avaliable, and every school would be forced to lower their "qualifications" at the risk of not filling their class.

I think only pre-meds say that because osteo schools may have lower stats that they are of lesser quality. For that matter, MSUCOM's admissions statistics are comparable to MANY allopathic schools.[/QUOTE]

If students who had higher stats were offsetting the students with lower credentials, the average entrance stats would be the same as an allopathic school. BUT THEY AREN'T! Nope, in reality, the class as a whole has lower stats, meaning that there are far more in the class with lower statistics.

And as for the last bolded comment: give me a break! Right off the MSUCOM website: "MCAT: the average for each entering class has ranged from 26 to 27. Here the range is somewhat narrower than the GPA review." The latter sentence rules out the possibility of a few students with really bad credentials lowering the stats of the class as a whole. Name me a single allopathic medical school, besides maybe the bottom 10, that have admissions criteria this low.

How can you just disreguard the bottom 10. No one here is arguing that the difference isn't there, I'm just saying that is really isn't that big. Aside from the "bottom 10" as you say, how about every offshore / international institution that takes applicants with low stats. In the end, they get to be MD's and have a shot to get good residencies, yet after they get into a residency you barely hear about how poor people think these schools are. These are MD degree-granting institutions. Yet even when a DO lands a competative allo residency, pre-med clowns will still look down.

 

[Haemulon]

How can you just disreguard the bottom 10. No one here is arguing that the difference isn't there, I'm just saying that is really isn't that big. Aside from the "bottom 10" as you say, how about every offshore / international institution that takes applicants with low stats. In the end, they get to be MD's and have a shot to get good residencies, yet after they get into a residency you barely hear about how poor people think these schools are. These are MD degree-granting institutions. Yet even when a DO lands a competative allo residency, pre-med clowns will still look down.

Good point, but there is still a stigma associated with IMG's in some instances. Non-US MD's sometimes have difficulty competing for top residencies/jobs. Whereas I do not think there is the same degree of stigma with DO's.

 

[WALKE219]

All I am going to say about all of this is:

Number 1 : I was talking about this year, and the stats you are quoting from the website are a couple years old, I think the 05 year if I remember correctly. This year the average was a 29. This is a competitive score considering most of the middle chunk of allo schools have an average of 29-31. Can't really disregard the bottom 10 considering they are in the pool of allo schools.

Number 2: As I said earlier, it is only pre-med students who measure a school's worth on average admittance scores and numbers. Hopefully one day you will reach a maturity peak when you can realize that admissions statistics have little to do with the quality of a program.

 

[east43rd]

Amen.

 

[MaximusD]

A D.O. does not have "a little extra!" without taking content out of somewhere else. It is highly unlikely that students at D.O. schools work harder and are trained better than their M.D. counterparts. The AOA needs to wake up and realize that D.O. schools are primarily a back door to allopathic residencies. If you guys are so gung ho about osteopathy then why do so many of apply to allopathic residencies?

[angry response was here...edited it out]

It's a legitimate alternative pathway that often leads to the same place. There is no BACK DOOR into anything in medicine you pompous dingus.

 

[J1515]

This is absolutely false. It's fabrication of credentials, pure and simple, and that's illegal. You could get your pants sued off for it. Some people, regardless of how the state feels, would still prefer to go to an MD over a DO or the other way around, so they have been lied to if a doctor advertises himself as something he's not.

Not too long ago, I heard about DO Ophthomologists and DO Orthopods saying that the DO on their coats stood for Doctor of Ophtho or Ortho, that too is illegal and could also lead to a lawsuit.

I've never seen a DO try to call himself an MD, outside of this little fantasy world of pre-meds that we call SDN. With that said, do tell what "credentials" an MD has that a DO doesn't? If a do writes MD on his/her coat, then it's misrepresentation. I agree with that. I'm not quite sure how credentials have been fabricated though if both MDs and DOs are licensed to practice medicine to the fullest extent. Your analogy of someone impersonating a police officer is ridiculous, since the average person has not been trained to enforce the law. Your analogy of a patient saying "I want to see an ivy league trained doctor" is equally as ridiculous, since doctor's coats don't say where they went to school (unless you think your's will, in which case I'd hope you'd have put your undergraduate school and GPA on it as well in case somebody only wants to see a doctor who had above a 3.9 in undergrad). I've never heard a patient say they'd rather see an MD over a DO in the emergency room, so you could imagine I've certainly never heard a patient say they'd rather see an ivy league graduate doctor over the state school doc I don't know where you people come up with these things.

In all seriousness, I'd like to see some written law somewhere that says there are penalties for a DO who advertises himself as an MD in a hospital as opposed to a pre-med student's opinion that it just is. Once again I'll state I've never seen it done and would never do it myself, but it seems like every pre-med student who only wants to go the allopathic route has mysteriously seen it done.

Oh, and one last thing, can you site a source (webpage, journal, or article) where DO opthomologists and orthopedists falsely stated that DO stood for doctor of optho or doctor of ortho? Or is this just another story that your uncle who's a neurosurgeon told you, or the many many doctors you've spoken to have told you?

As far as the change in the initials from DO to MD/DO and other ridiculous nonsense, I agree that the people who are gung ho for this idea are the insecure pre-osteo and osteo students who really wish they could've gone MD but couldn't. The answer to them is either go to the Carribean or give up the idea of being a doctor, but just stop whining about the letters after your name. There's no need to change things. On the rare (and I mean rare) occasion that somebody asks you what DO stands for, I know it's a pain in the a** to take 10 seconds and tell them how it was based on a different philosophy a long time ago, but I'm sure it'll be equally as painful to answer 100 questions from a worried mother whether her 2 year old son who has a common cold is going to be ok, so maybe you should just get out of medicine now and save yourself a lot of pain.

 

[Dr.Inviz]

[angry response was here...edited it out]

It's a legitimate alternative pathway that often leads to the same place. There is no BACK DOOR into anything in medicine you pompous dingus.

I'd say a back door is those online centers that give you a medical degree after 1 year of paying for nonsense bullsh*t. That's the only backdoor I know of.

DO medicine is not a backdoor. It is a certified/licensed medical program. However, it does allow you to get into an allo-residency position without actually requiring someone to go into an allo med school. Like Max suggests, it is an alternative form, not exactly some shady back-door pathway.

 

[Pansit]

OMG...I wanted this thread to discuss if a designation change would effectively advance the osteopathic profession or if it would be a waste of time. It was not intended to be an MD vs. DO thing, and that those that want to change some aspects of Osteopathic medicine have inferiority complexes. People automatically assume that the letters "MD" are designated solely for allopathic students and those that suggest them have some sort of secret wish to be in the allopathic route. Thats not true👎. Do students that end up in MD residencies have inferiority complexes as well, because they want to be at least seen as equal? I dont think so. This designation deal is just one of many factors (Internship year, more schools, AOA residencies...etc) that is being talked about to help improve the profession. Now I saw a lot of threads on the other stuff and not so much on this one without it going into an MD vs. DO thing. I figured only osteo students would be in pre osteo forums.

As for the lower statistics, it is definitely true that they are lower in Osteo schools. But how many osteo students end up failing medical schools, failing out of their boards, and not get residencies. Probably the same percentage as allopathic students. So talking about entrance numbers don't mean anything if everyone is getting to where they want to be. It's like all of us in undergrad talking about how this schools SAT's are higher than that school, nobody cares as soon as you get into your class. What is more important is that both allopathic and osteopathic schools have some cut-off limit to MCAT and GPA because they know that below those limits the students probably will not do well. A 3.4 student will be competitive as much as a 3.9 student. Believe me it has happened.

 

[Dr.Inviz]

OMG...I wanted this thread to discuss if a designation change would effectively advance the osteopathic profession or if it would be a waste of time. It was not intended to be an MD vs. DO thing, and that those that want to change some aspects of Osteopathic medicine have inferiority complexes. People automatically assume that the letters "MD" are designated solely for allopathic students and those that suggest them have some sort of secret wish to be in the allopathic route. Thats not true👎. Do students that end up in MD residencies have inferiority complexes as well, because they want to be at least seen as equal? I dont think so. This designation deal is just one of many factors (Internship year, more schools, AOA residencies...etc) that is being talked about to help improve the profession. Now I saw a lot of threads on the other stuff and not so much on this one without it going into an MD vs. DO thing. I figured only osteo students would be in pre osteo forums.

As for the lower statistics, it is definitely true that they are lower in Osteo schools. But how many osteo students end up failing medical schools, failing out of their boards, and not get residencies. Probably the same percentage as allopathic students. So talking about entrance numbers don't mean anything if everyone is getting to where they want to be. It's like all of us in undergrad talking about how this schools SAT's are higher than that school, nobody cares as soon as you get into your class. What is more important is that both allopathic and osteopathic schools have some cut-off limit to MCAT and GPA because they know that below those limits the students probably will not do well. A 3.4 student will be competitive as much as a 3.9 student. Believe me it has happened.

I'm sure there are other reasons as to a 3.4 being as competitive as a 3.9. These include MCAT, ECs, LORs, interview skills, etc.

 

[Pansit]

I'm sure there are other reasons as to a 3.4 being as competitive as a 3.9. These include MCAT, ECs, LORs, interview skills, etc.

I was talking about while they are already in medical school...those numbers mean nothing once you are in is what I was trying to say.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

OMG...I wanted this thread to discuss if a designation change would effectively advance the osteopathic profession or if it would be a waste of time. It was not intended to be an MD vs. DO thing, and that those that want to change some aspects of Osteopathic medicine have inferiority complexes. People automatically assume that the letters "MD" are designated solely for allopathic students and those that suggest them have some sort of secret wish to be in the allopathic route. Thats not true👎. Do students that end up in MD residencies have inferiority complexes as well, because they want to be at least seen as equal? I dont think so. This designation deal is just one of many factors (Internship year, more schools, AOA residencies...etc) that is being talked about to help improve the profession. Now I saw a lot of threads on the other stuff and not so much on this one without it going into an MD vs. DO thing. I figured only osteo students would be in pre osteo forums.

As for the lower statistics, it is definitely true that they are lower in Osteo schools. But how many osteo students end up failing medical schools, failing out of their boards, and not get residencies. Probably the same percentage as allopathic students. So talking about entrance numbers don't mean anything if everyone is getting to where they want to be. It's like all of us in undergrad talking about how this schools SAT's are higher than that school, nobody cares as soon as you get into your class. What is more important is that both allopathic and osteopathic schools have some cut-off limit to MCAT and GPA because they know that below those limits the students probably will not do well. A 3.4 student will be competitive as much as a 3.9 student. Believe me it has happened.

In short, you (not directly to OP...you as in anyone) are a fool for thinking that changing the letters is going to "advance" osteopathic medicine. End of thread.

 

[Dr.Inviz]

In short, you (not directly to OP...you as in anyone) are a fool for thinking that changing the letters is going to "advance" osteopathic medicine. End of thread.

Changing the letters would simply imply the end of a branch of medicine and consolidate the 2 "branches" into 1. The question would be which one, and the obvious choice with be allopathic medicine. However, if there was ever a consensus, it could just be "medicine" and remove allo/osteo. Thus, the title could be "DM" (Doctor of Medicine). I doubt this would ever happen, making this thread pointless.

 

[Pansit]

In short, you (not directly to OP...you as in anyone) are a fool for thinking that changing the letters is going to "advance" osteopathic medicine. End of thread.

I think changing the letters would help in the international recognition process...would that not advance osteopathic medicine?...it probably doesnt matter to you but to others who want to or end up having to go out of the country it becomes a big deal. Thank you for at least giving an opinion and not saying, "well your just insecure, go to an allopathic school", which by the way I could have but turned it down.

 

[Dr JPH]

5.) For the history buff, A.T. Still was an MD, DO

He never graduated from an osteopathic medical school. (technically he never graduated from an allopathic medical school either)