MD vs DO

[stonewall22]

Are DOs as competitive as MDs for military residencies, or do DOs face the same uphill fight for competitive residencies (ortho etc.) that they would face applying for an allopathic residency?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[spicedmanna]

Are DOs as competitive as MDs for military residencies, or do DOs face the same uphill fight for competitive residencies (ortho etc.) that they would face applying for an allopathic residency?

I'd say that both MD's and DO's are going to have an uphill battle for residencies in "highly-competitive" specialities, particularly in the military. There are significantly fewer training slots for these competitive specialities than in the civilian world. In many cases, you'll likely be doing an GMO/FS billet before being able to match in such a program as PGY-2. It's tough enough in the civilian match, but it's even tougher in the military match.

I can't speak for the other branches, but my very cursory glance of the airforce situation leads me to think that they currently favor FM, GS, and IM, just based on the rather disproportionate number of GME slots available for them.

Unless you are gung-ho about being a military physician, don't mind doing a GMO/FS tour in the middle of your training, and don't care that your salary is going to be low compared to your counterpart in the civilian world (we are talking about "highly-competitive" specialies), you may want to reconsider this route. Your degree designation doesn't, for the most part, play a role in GME opportunities, as long as you are a great candidate. However, the relative paucity of GME slots for highly-competitive specialies in the military is going to impact you plenty. That's what you'll want to weight against your desire to be a military physician.

 

[TheGoose]

a lot of milmed is staffed by DOs

 

[narcusprince]

Just don't go to lecom they are child molesters.

 

[|2idicu|ous]

Just don't go to lecom they are child molesters.

wow

 

[Mirror Form]

Mil Med residencies are less biased in regard to MD's and DO's. However, a lot of the dept chair's in mil med are older MD's, and some still tend to favor MD's over DO's at least slightly.

 

[narcusprince]

Google the story about the Lecom student who was setting up sex slaves and had a fellow student sex slave. Look it up on msnbc truly disgusting.

 

[LauraDO]

Just don't go to lecom they are child molesters.

Yeah let us just make sure we seperate out Lecom Erie from Lecom Bradenton in Florida, we are on the straight and narrow here in Bradenton😀

 

[Milamber]

Just don't go to lecom they are child molesters.

Listen just because one student did that doesn't make the rest of us bad apples. I mean the rest of us are just into that whole bondage thing, I mean what do you think we do in OMM class?

 

[bustbones26]

Just don't go to lecom they are child molesters.

Whoa, wait a minute, as a fellow LECOM graduate I assure you that I am not a child molester. But think of it this way, LECOM is building an empire with a massive amount of medical students if you consider their two, now pending three campuses. With a population that big, at least one person is going to have some psychiatric pathology.

Overall, I have to say, it just goes to show you that you never just know what kind of sick people are really out there practicing medicine.

 

[a1qwerty55]

Are DOs as competitive as MDs for military residencies, or do DOs face the same uphill fight for competitive residencies (ortho etc.) that they would face applying for an allopathic residency?

DO's are at a disadvantage. They in GENERAL have much more difficulty with test taking and as such have issues with board passage they have lower MCATs and their schools are in GENERAL not affiliated with major institutions of learning and thus farm their medical students out to anyone who will train them, with the associated loss of quality control. They also seem to come in far less prepared to function as a physician than those graduates from MD schools. There is a lot of consternation among residency program directors about the military's reliance on DO's and the very clear decline in the caliber of HPSP accesions.

This is going to sound mean, but I think it is funny that LECOM (whatever the hell that stands for) is opening a 3rd campus. Let's face it, if you "medical school" is in a strip mall, don't be surprised if some of us are skeptical. What's next - Univesity of Pheonix offering medical degrees online?

Its frank, blunt, painful but the truth.

 

[LauraDO]

DO's are at a disadvantage. They in GENERAL have much more difficulty with test taking and as such have issues with board passage they have lower MCATs and their schools are in GENERAL not affiliated with major institutions of learning and thus farm their medical students out to anyone who will train them, with the associated loss of quality control. They also seem to come in far less prepared to function as a physician than those graduates from MD schools. There is a lot of consternation among residency program directors about the military's reliance on DO's and the very clear decline in the caliber of HPSP accesions.

This is going to sound mean, but I think it is funny that LECOM (whatever the hell that stands for) is opening a 3rd campus. Let's face it, if you "medical school" is in a strip mall, don't be surprised if some of us are skeptical. What's next - Univesity of Pheonix offering medical degrees online?

Its frank, blunt, painful but the truth.

This is true in many ways and I agree with many things you are saying, however you also make many broad generalizations which I think are a bit unfair. I only applied D.O. not because I couldn't get into an MD school, but because I only wanted to go D.O. I am sure there are many others who did the same thing

Also (and I will proclaim bias since I go to LECOM (florida campus)) but we have tied for number one in highest board scores for the second year in a row. They may be strip mall medical school, but they are obviously doing something right

I also do not believe that because I am attending a D.O. school I will be any less qualified as a physician than my M.D. counterparts, perhaps I will have to work a bit hard to attain a variety of quality training, but like anything in life, opportunities to succeed always exist...but only if you look for them

 

[notdeadyet]

If the residencies really want to distinguish the good students from the bad, regardless of their degree, all they really have to do is look at their USMLE/COMLEX scores. It's not rocket science.

This is true, if you're assuming that an individual's performance on a couple of days of standardized testing really distinguishes much.

Sometimes I think folks in medicine really drink deep from the standardized testing Kool-aid. Probably comes from being weaned at a young age on doing well on the Pre-SAT, then the SAT, then the MCAT, then the USMLE, etc. etc. etc.

Happily, the value of scores like the USMLE is just going down. Lots of residencies are looking at USMLE scores more as a "can they read well?" and then give LORs and rotation evals much bigger weight.

No interest in the MD vs. DO thing. Too often DO's feel obligated to defend their choice regardless of whether they had other options or not and MD students feel the need to flaunt superiority at the risk of their degree being somehow unvalued. It's tired (not Tired).

 

[notdeadyet]

Also, as far as decreasing the weight on USMLE,

I don't have the time right now, but if you want to do a search, you'll see a fair bit of news about this. The USMLE folks have been considering making the Step I/II pass/fail within the next few years. There were links posted to this information from USMLE and the like around SDN before. It shouldn't be too hard to find if you're interested. One of the deans actually mentioned that the class below mine may be the last one to take a non-pass/fail Step I.

you're either talking about FP, or you're fooling yourself.

No. Uber-competitive specialties are still USMLE-obsessed (RadOnc, Derm, Rads, etc.), but some of the rest seem less interested in Step 1 than you might think. Surgery sure seems to be one of the hold-outs, but that doesn't impact me.

I was at a talk with several residency directors for EM and all three were pretty ho-hum about Step 1 score, one saying "Just pass it". All three also mentioned that they didn't see a real correlation between performance and test scores. A good score is better than a bad, but all said that great letters/evals instead of okay letters/evals >>>>> great USMLE scores instead of okay USMLE scores.

I doubt this holds true for all fields, but it seems to for the ones I've been looking into. Step I is not the end-all/be-all once you get out of surgery and the highest hanging fruit.

 

[Fly Army]

Some one posted that most of the military PDs are old MDs; I agree. And I do think a lot of these PDs are more "comfortable" with the MD degree. The "strip mall med school" expansion by some of the DO schools it not likely to help. Regardless, there are DOs in these competitive programs and they are doing very well. As a rez in an ortho program, when DO med studs ask if they should consider taking the USMLE I always say yes. MDs are comfortable with the USMLE... and while they may somewhat understand a powerpoint brief on COMLEX scores, ultimately I would be willing to bet they would feel more comfortable with a passing USMLE score than an average COMLEX score. Can't say I blame them. If the off-shore schools come up with the IMGLEX and say they scored a 1,000,000 so they should be considered in the top 1%... yeah, yeah. NOt a real text but you get the idea. If you think you might be interested in a rez program that seems to have more MDs than DOs, take the USMLE and assist the MD program director in feeling confident you will pass your boards after rez graduation. Your board performance (pass/fail) after rez is very important to the program. Having said all that, there are plenty of DOs that did not take the COMLEX, landed a spot in a competitive program with only MD attendings... passed all their boards and are doing very well. There is a little MD vs. DO thing when is comes to getting into some of the military rez programs.... shouldn't stop you. But would recommend one highly consider taking the USMLE to assist the program directors in the selection process.

 

[BOHICA-FIGMO]

This is true, if you're assuming that an individual's performance on a couple of days of standardized testing really distinguishes much.

Sometimes I think folks in medicine really drink deep from the standardized testing Kool-aid. Probably comes from being weaned at a young age on doing well on the Pre-SAT, then the SAT, then the MCAT, then the USMLE, etc. etc. etc.

Happily, the value of scores like the USMLE is just going down. Lots of residencies are looking at USMLE scores more as a "can they read well?" and then give LORs and rotation evals much bigger weight.

No interest in the MD vs. DO thing. Too often DO's feel obligated to defend their choice regardless of whether they had other options or not and MD students feel the need to flaunt superiority at the risk of their degree being somehow unvalued. It's tired (not Tired).

Mega-dittos. The NBME explicitly states on that the USMLE is NOT a standardized test, applicants CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be directly compared to one another--given the way the test is scored and given that no one takes the same test. Unfortunately, some residency directors are locked into the old view when the USMLE was a standardized paper test and applicants could be directly compared.

Further, so many schools have "gone soft" with the pass/fail/honors thing, directors are struggling to find ways to compare applicants. Therefore, a person with three pass, three honors, and a 230 Step 1 will usually get rated higher than someone with 3B's, 3 A's, and a 215 Step 1. Is there any REAL difference between these two candidates? Not really. That is (one reason) why medicine in America is FUBAR.

 

[Mirror Form]

Seriously, if you take a bunch of kids with 25-30 MCAT scores, and GPAs under 3.7, is anyone really shocked a few years years later when these same people have lower inservice training scores and somewhat less ability to function on the wards? Garbage in, garbage out.

This is a pretty ******ed thing to say. Just b/c DO schools aren't as competitive as MD schools are (in genera), doesn't mean they produce poor physicians. That's like saying anybody who doesn't go to a top 10 med school is garbage b/c they had worse board scores to begin with and probably worst test scores later on.

BTW, we should all be very thankful for DO schools. MD schools stopped making it a priority to train 1/2 the number of needed doctors a long time ago. So every slot in residency that DO's get now would be going to a FMG otherwise. I'm not sure why the allopathic med schools wanted to see half of our physicians come from overseas, but oh well.

 

[notdeadyet]

BTW, we should all be very thankful for DO schools. MD schools stopped making it a priority to train 1/2 the number of needed doctors a long time ago. So every slot in residency that DO's get now would be going to a FMG otherwise.

Is DO's being dismissive of IMG/FMG's really all that different from MD's being dismissive of DO's?

Do folks need to feel superior to the next guy to be confident in themselves? It smacks of rich kid elitism or the kids who got picked on in the playground.

 

[Mirror Form]

Is DO's being dismissive of IMG/FMG's really all that different from MD's being dismissive of DO's?

Do folks need to feel superior to the next guy to be confident in themselves? It smacks of rich kid elitism or the kids who got picked on in the playground.

Sorry, but I'm an M.D. And for record, anyone who thinks that we should be turning US students away from med school while hiring half our doctors from third world countries is insane.

 

[pgg]

Happily, the value of scores like the USMLE is just going down. Lots of residencies are looking at USMLE scores more as a "can they read well?" and then give LORs and rotation evals much bigger weight.

I have no reason to doubt that this trend is true. But you seem to agree with this strategy - can you explain the rationale behind why you think

• less emphasis on a nationally administered exam
• more emphasis on subjective MS3 evals (in my case, they were often written months after I'd left and were utterly random and disconnected from reality)
• more emphasis on subjective LORs from people chosen by the applicant

are all a good thing?

 

[notdeadyet]

And for record, anyone who thinks that we should be turning US students away from med school while hiring half our doctors from third world countries is insane.

Oh, I don't know. I've worked with a few doctors born and trained in India who are much better and more qualified physicians than some of our lower end domestics.

And how does St. Georges and Ross grads fit into the equation? They're training in developing nations. And some of their grads get better residencies than the bottom of the class US allopaths. Is that "insane"?

I'm just curious if your objection is to where folks have trained or where folks were born.

 

[notdeadyet]

I have no reason to doubt that this trend is true. But you seem to agree with this strategy

Nah. If I had to vote, I'd keep the USMLE and I'd keep it numeric instead of pass/fail. The advantage of the USMLE is that you have an opportunity to see how one students tests versus how another student tests. You can't rely on grades because schools vary so much from one to the other.

I'm not anti-USMLE. I just don't buy into the notion that the USMLE should be viewed as an end-all/be-all to determining what kind of physicians people will be. It wasn't set up that way and shouldn't be used that way.

It's just a standardized test. It's a useful tool when used in conjuction with LORs, evaluations, resume and in-person interview.

But as a standalone to determine whether applicant A is better than applicant B? No.

 

[notdeadyet]

I didn't say they produce poor physicians. But I'm hardly the first person to notice that, in general, the quality of the average DO-graduate is not as good as the average MD-graduate. And it's nothing to do with the curriculum or the degree, it's student selection, plain and simple.

Would you also say that in general the quality of the average state medical school graduate is not as good as the quality of the top 20 med school graduate, based on student selection? Just curious how far that extends.

 

[usnavdoc]

Happily, the value of scores like the USMLE is just going down. Lots of residencies are looking at USMLE scores more as a "can they read well?" and then give LORs and rotation evals much bigger weight.(not Tired).

You are fooling yourself! No idea what residencies you are looking at but this is completely not true. The biggest criteria to get an interview is boards followed by class standing/GPA. LORs and Personal statements are usually looked at way down the line often just prior to your interview, so that the interviewer knows who you are.

 

[MaximusD]

DO's are at a disadvantage. They in GENERAL have much more difficulty with test taking and as such have issues with board passage they have lower MCATs and their schools are in GENERAL not affiliated with major institutions of learning and thus farm their medical students out to anyone who will train them, with the associated loss of quality control. They also seem to come in far less prepared to function as a physician than those graduates from MD schools. There is a lot of consternation among residency program directors about the military's reliance on DO's and the very clear decline in the caliber of HPSP accesions.

This is going to sound mean, but I think it is funny that LECOM (whatever the hell that stands for) is opening a 3rd campus. Let's face it, if you "medical school" is in a strip mall, don't be surprised if some of us are skeptical. What's next - Univesity of Pheonix offering medical degrees online?

Its frank, blunt, painful but the truth.

a BIG 👎

There is a ton of variation within the osteopathic medical profession and you're lack of acknowledgement of that fact just demonstrates your intellectual laziness at best and dishonesty at worst.

I could find a list of MD schools that offer inferior training to the top DO schools when it comes to clinical opportunities and yes, even residency programs. Let me put it to you this way, I can SPECIFICALLY make a list of quite a few MD programs that are inferior to PCOM in a multitude of measures.

 

[MaximusD]

I've never understood why folks insist on making this about the DO degree or the curriculum. It's really nothing to do with the education they're offering, and everything to do with the students they select.

Seriously, if you take a bunch of kids with 25-30 MCAT scores, and GPAs under 3.7, is anyone really shocked a few years years later when these same people have lower inservice training scores and somewhat less ability to function on the wards? Garbage in, garbage out.

If the residencies really want to distinguish the good students from the bad, regardless of their degree, all they really have to do is look at their USMLE/COMLEX scores. It's not rocket science.

"Garbage in, garbage out" is based upon a false premise. You assume that GPA and MCAT scores correlates directly with ability and talent as physician. You deny this later, but you clearly imply your feelings on the matter here.

 

[notdeadyet]

You are fooling yourself! No idea what residencies you are looking at but this is completely not true.

Emergency Medicine, west coast. I've heard from more than one residency director that USMLE's are just not that big a deal for them. They mentioned that they didn't find a correlation between Step I's and how folks did in the residency program when they arrived.

EM may be different from more research-y residencies. I've also heard the same ho-hum interest from Psychiatry programs, but this would make sense as psych is far from competitive.

I should also note, in fairness, that I haven't been targeting the "top" programs, just because I don't know that they exist, as they're all about fit. These programs were a great fit for me, but maybe I'm self-selecting to approach residency directors that don't come from uptight programs where they put too much stock in the holiness of standardized testing.

The biggest criteria to get an interview is boards followed by class standing/GPA. LORs and Personal statements are usually looked at way down the line often just prior to your interview, so that the interviewer knows who you are.

Huh. I'm curious how programs do that, as schools are making massive movements to Pass/Fail systems. I know of lots that have made that switch and none that have gone from P/F to GPA. I think you're over-valuing grades. Also, lots of P/F schools do not do class standing, either.

Any generalizations about what gets you "a residency" needs to be taken with a heavy grain of salt. There are just too many differences in the approaches of different fields and programs. I'd recommend folks contact the directors of programs they are interested in and see what answer you get. Depending on your goals, you may get answers in line with usnavdoc or you may get answers in line with mine.

 

[Mirror Form]

Oh, I don't know. I've worked with a few doctors born and trained in India who are much better and more qualified physicians than some of our lower end domestics.

I've also worked with some doctors from india and pakistan who are total menaces to society. That doesn't extend to the majority of FMG's of course. But it doesn't change the fact that it's ridiculous to hire FMG's with US *tax dollars* while turning away US grads. This is especially true given that foreign med schools aren't that competitive (yes, i know this b/c one of my former roommates was a graduate of med school from India).

And how does St. Georges and Ross grads fit into the equation? They're training in developing nations. And some of their grads get better residencies than the bottom of the class US allopaths. Is that "insane"?

It further corroborates my point that we should have more med schools based in the US, and stop this ridiculous practice of hiring foreign trained physicians.

I'm just curious if your objection is to where folks have trained or where folks were born.

I'm more inclined to hire US citizens who trained abroad then to import foreign citizens. Either way, hiring graduates of foreign med schools b/c we can't train enough physicians ourselves, meanwhile the US is turning students away from medical school in droves, is just crazy.

 

[HackFuJones]

No, actually I never denied it. I agree 100% that in general high GPA and MCAT scores correlates with ability and talent as a physician.

What I said is that Osteopathic schools do not produce poor physicians.

You have a very narrow view of what a "quality physician" is, especially in the eyes of patients, and not just residency directors and other elitist MDs. Yes, in "general" I would agree that (USA) MDs have better scores/grades and are probably more equipped to do research and difficult concept specialties than DOs which all the big wig program directors like because thats how they get their funding, HOWEVER, you also have to remember that DO schools tend to rank experience, personality, character, and social/communication skills more heavily than MD schools (which lets be honest, the nerds with the high scores are "in general" social rejects, and have trouble dealing with people. ie.. surgeons lol), and in many "patients" minds, that makes DOs excellent doctors which explains the explosion of popularity of the Osteopathic profession in the last 2 decades. So you should probably be more specific rather than generalize your own opinions of what a good physician is because for the majority of patients I can guarantee you for the most part they would rather have a "225 and a smile" over a "250 and a scowl".

 

[notdeadyet]

(which lets be honest, the nerds with the high scores are "in general" social rejects, and have trouble dealing with people. ie.. surgeons lol)

Not true. One thing I haven't found is correlation between intelligence and social skills. The socially inept medical students are just as likely to be the right side of the curve as the left. The stereotype of someone who performs well on standardized tests as being social misfits is inaccurate. There are plenty of shy and inarticulate med students, but it has no relationship to how smart they are.

and in many "patients" minds, that makes DOs excellent doctors which explains the explosion of popularity of the Osteopathic profession in the last 2 decades.

The fact that allopathic schools haven't grown in number like osteopathic schools has nothing to do with patients stating preference for osteopaths. It has to do with uncontrolled growth. The fact that LECOM has multiple campuses and UCLA has one doesn't make LECOM a better school or osteopaths more popular.

There are a lot more McDonald's than In-and-Out, but that doesn't mean they make a better burger.

 

[pgg]

The fact that allopathic schools haven't grown in number like osteopathic schools has nothing to do with patients stating preference for osteopaths. It has to do with uncontrolled growth.

My gripe with all the new DO schools being built is that they've abandoned that quaint old allopathic tradition of having an associated large, tertiary care teaching hospital.

Kinda like the Caribbean for-profit med schools, actually.

The bottleneck for the pipeline that produces board-certified physicians in this country is residency slots. Seems to me that if they were really interested in producing physicians, they'd put a little more effort into training them after they finish medical school, instead of throwing them to the wolves of the allopathic match.

My brother's a DO student. He'll be as capable a physician as any MD. But his school didn't do him or his classmates any favors by failing to create any new residency slots out there, either by establishing or expanding a teaching hospital.

 

[HackFuJones]

Not true. One thing I haven't found is correlation between intelligence and social skills. The socially inept medical students are just as likely to be the right side of the curve as the left. The stereotype of someone who performs well on standardized tests as being social misfits is inaccurate. There are plenty of shy and inarticulate med students, but it has no relationship to how smart they are.quote]

Actually Im gonna still disagree with you. If you dont believe that the best of the Type A gunners out there who, "in general", have the higher scores are less liked by their peers and patients, then you havent been paying attention throughout your life because MANY people have noticed this phenomenon which is why it has become a "Stereotype" in the first place. No one is saying all smart people have inadequate social skills because of course its not true in the least bit because I feel Im a good scorer with social skills for example, and there are tons like me, but as a general rule, if you got into medical school and you werent really that smart, then you probably made up for it in other ways by having strong social skills, etc, compared to the guy with no social skills that had to be brilliant to get in. The fact of the matter is Im mostly talking about the extremes of the profession which do however influence scores, where on the one hand you have the brilliant ******* vs the lovable ******* but unfortunately in the realm of scores the lovable ******* looks poorly but it doesnt necesarily mean their isnt a place for them in medicine, just like the brilliant ******* probably shouldnt be a pediatrician, the ******* probably shouldnt do Cardiology. Most of us MD and DO alike fall somewhere in the middle and my point was that there is more to being a good physician than just scores and grades which the other poster was alluding to and that the DO schools tend to emphasize this more than MD schools.

As for your other point about Osteopathic growth and Mc Donalds hamburgers, you missed the point. I said "popularity" which is far different than "growth", and I never said DOs were more popular than MDs by any stretch, I just said the publics perception of us is increasing in popularity. Growth will naturally happen because of supply and demand of physicians which is why we farm foreigners like crazy who can barely communicate with patients and staff and why we are starting satelite mall schools(which actually I disagree with mainly from a professional prestige perspective) and making Nurse doctors which sucks. Popularity though is the "growth" in satisfaction and stature which our profession has been incurring steadily due to our slightly different approach to medicine which appeals to certain people in the ever changing medical environment. Its not better or worse, its just different from what your used to and I get insulted by some because I have a somewhat different subset of skills than you do and I dont think thats very fair. Its kinda like saying KungFu is better than Tai Chi (which it is 😉 j/k), when in reality its sort of hard to compare the 2 because their intentions although similar, are not exactly the same.

Anyway, these MD vs DO things annoy me so Im done.. What it really boils down to is if your PATIENT thinks you did a good job, and you got them better in the safest most effective way possible, plain and simple. If you do that, all will fall into place no matter who you are.

 

[HackFuJones]

My gripe with all the new DO schools being built is that they've abandoned that quaint old allopathic tradition of having an associated large, tertiary care teaching hospital.

Kinda like the Caribbean for-profit med schools, actually.

The bottleneck for the pipeline that produces board-certified physicians in this country is residency slots. Seems to me that if they were really interested in producing physicians, they'd put a little more effort into training them after they finish medical school, instead of throwing them to the wolves of the allopathic match.

My brother's a DO student. He'll be as capable a physician as any MD. But his school didn't do him or his classmates any favors by failing to create any new residency slots out there, either by establishing or expanding a teaching hospital.

this is an excellent point and is shared by ALL DOs as well...Not sure if its money or what but the AOA definetly needs to get off its ass and start more residency teaching hospitals. Im guessing its because financially teaching hospitals are a total loss and its tough to start them, but there has to be some way to get more and it needs to be done soon given the recent increase the last few years of schools.

 

[MaximusD]

My gripe with all the new DO schools being built is that they've abandoned that quaint old allopathic tradition of having an associated large, tertiary care teaching hospital.

Kinda like the Caribbean for-profit med schools, actually.

The bottleneck for the pipeline that produces board-certified physicians in this country is residency slots. Seems to me that if they were really interested in producing physicians, they'd put a little more effort into training them after they finish medical school, instead of throwing them to the wolves of the allopathic match.

My brother's a DO student. He'll be as capable a physician as any MD. But his school didn't do him or his classmates any favors by failing to create any new residency slots out there, either by establishing or expanding a teaching hospital.

Once again everone here points to the low points of the entire profession. What about the top 5-10 DO schools who have build LARGE amt of residency programs such as UMDNJ, PCOM, MSU-COM, DMUCOM, CCOM, and NYCOM? A teaching hospital is great, but it becomes irrelevant if you have lots of close associations with major hospitals. For instance, PCOM has a huge association with Lankenau, which is arguably one of the best hospitals in the US and has several dually-accredited AOA/AGCME residencies. How does this fit into your equation?

It doesn't because you've been programmed to believe in a false premise. Think outside of the box OR do some research before you espouse idiot generalizations. That goes for everyone (including myself -- just not in this particular context).

 

[pgg]

How does this fit into your equation?

It doesn't fit into my equation, my reading-comprehension-impaired friend, because I was specifically talking about

• newly founded/expanded schools that DON'T have "close associations" with major teaching hospitals
• my brother's school in particular, which DOESN'T have a "close association" with a major teaching hospital
• an overall lack of osteopathic RESIDENCY slots, which is altogether different than the "where DO students go for MS3 & MS4 clinical rotations" issue

Nowhere did I bash or insult DOs, so stop being so defensive.

DO schools produce, on the whole, graduates who are every bit as capable as those from MD schools. A huge number of DOs end up in the allopathic match because there aren't enough osteopathic residency slots out there. The fact that the recently opened DO schools aren't doing anything to rectify this problem ought to concern you.

 

[notdeadyet]

If you dont believe that the best of the Type A gunners out there who, "in general", have the higher scores are less liked by their peers and patients, then you havent been paying attention throughout your life because MANY people have noticed this phenomenon which is why it has become a "Stereotype" in the first place.

Wow. There's a certain irony in someone trying to fight against the stereotype of DO's being inferior to MD's then turning around and saying there has to be a lot of truth in stereotypes by definitions.

We'll just have to disagree. I tihnk a lot of it depends on your medical school. If a school recruits purely by the numbers, I can see how you can get some real losers with top marks. If a school does a good interview and screening process, you can only take in folks with great marks who also have great people skills. At my school, I haven't seen any correlation between super smart and socially inept. Maybe it's that way at schools who are true number-******.

 

[notdeadyet]

Most of us MD and DO alike fall somewhere in the middle and my point was that there is more to being a good physician than just scores and grades which the other poster was alluding to and that the DO schools tend to emphasize this more than MD schools.

I was disputing the notion that USMLE=great doc in the first place, so I agree with you on that one. As for the DO schools emphasizing whole applicant more than MD schools? I don't know. I never attended an osteopathic school so I can't say.

One thing I will say is this: one of the reasons that some allopaths have a tough time figuring out what to make of osteopathic medicine is because often the message coming from osteopaths is a little contradictory.

"The MD and DO training are completely comparable. DO training is identical to MD with the addition of some OMM." You hear this a lot from folks. It seems perfectly logical. I buy it. But you also hear lots of DO's saying "DO training focuses more on the whole patient than MD training. DO training emphasizes the patient more than the illness, compared to MD training." You hear that a lot, too. But the second is in opposition to the first. The training is either identical or different. We hear both.

Another set of contradictions is "Osteopathic schools and allopathic schools have comparable applicants. Why, look at the MCAT/GPA average at (insert DO school) and look at the averages at (insert MD school). We have comparable applicants." Those numbers don't mean a whole lot to me regardless, but that's cool. But you also hear a lot of "Osteopathic schools have lower scores because we look for the 'whole applicant'". Again, this contradicts the first statement. Osteopathic schools are either comparable in testing ability of allopathic schools or they're not. And the idea that allopathic schools don't look for the whole applicant can leave folks feeling a little insulted as well. And, frankly, untrue. Personally, my stats were below the norm for my medical school; they just liked my story.

I support osteopathic medicine because I've worked with and been treated by too many good osteopaths to view them as inferior in any way.

Right now, I get the impression that osteopathic medicine is in a time of transition and you're feeling the growing pains. From someone ouside that world, the iimpressions is that there are becoming two camps of thought, some of whom take the "It's all the same" philosophy and others who take the "Different but equal" approach. Until there's some kind of consensus or at least a unified message coming out of the AOA (that'll be the day), you'll have to forgive some of the allopaths that don't know what to make of the DO degree. There isn't a consistent message and it can puzzle people.

That said, there are also a lot of allopathic bigots who just dislike the idea of DO because, well, it's not their degree. Ignore them. They're untrainable.

 

[notdeadyet]

I never said DOs were more popular than MDs by any stretch, I just said the publics perception of us is increasing in popularity.

What does that mean? Apologies, but I don't understand how that is different from popularity? Are you talking about awareness of the DO degree? I can maybe buy that.

I'd love to see some data on it. And I wonder how much of it is regional. I've heard that in some parts of the country which have large DO schools, the DO degree is well recognized by the patient body. Out in areas where there aren't a lot of DO schools, I don't think the degree is very well known. I can see that changing with the new schools, though.

Popularity though is the "growth" in satisfaction and stature which our profession has been incurring steadily due to our slightly different approach to medicine which appeals to certain people in the ever changing medical environment. Its not better or worse, its just different from what your used to and I get insulted by some because I have a somewhat different subset of skills than you do and I dont think thats very fair. Its kinda like saying KungFu is better than Tai Chi (which it is 😉 j/k), when in reality its sort of hard to compare the 2 because their intentions although similar, are not exactly the same.

Yeah, again, this message goes back to the image issue. It's hard to push for the big differences between MDs and DOs when so many of your colleagues also push for how MD and DO is completely the same.

What it really boils down to is if your PATIENT thinks you did a good job, and you got them better in the safest most effective way possible, plain and simple. If you do that, all will fall into place no matter who you are.

I couldn't agree with you more there. You treat a patient right and the last thing they care about is where you went to medical school. That's true if you went to Harvard MD vs. Pi$$water Falls Backstate MD vs. Pikesvill DO vs. Upstairs Hollywood Florida Osteopathic Medical College.

 

[MaximusD]

It doesn't fit into my equation, my reading-comprehension-impaired friend, because I was specifically talking about

• newly founded/expanded schools that DON'T have "close associations" with major teaching hospitals
• my brother's school in particular, which DOESN'T have a "close association" with a major teaching hospital
• an overall lack of osteopathic RESIDENCY slots, which is altogether different than the "where DO students go for MS3 & MS4 clinical rotations" issue

Nowhere did I bash or insult DOs, so stop being so defensive.

DO schools produce, on the whole, graduates who are every bit as capable as those from MD schools. A huge number of DOs end up in the allopathic match because there aren't enough osteopathic residency slots out there. The fact that the recently opened DO schools aren't doing anything to rectify this problem ought to concern you.

There are plenty of DO spots, actually. Many go unfilled... however, they are often less-than-desirable for one reason or another (primary care, bad location, etc).

Just avoid the generalizations and we'll be fine. I agree with you on many of the points above, and think that the rampant expansion of the osteopathic medical profession is deplorable. I'm a OMSII, so I don't think I have any say in the matter yet...

 

[dikoerastenie]

.

 

[dikoerastenie]

I was disputing the notion that USMLE=great doc in the first place, so I agree with you on that one. As for the DO schools emphasizing whole applicant more than MD schools? I don't know. I never attended an osteopathic school so I can't say.

One thing I will say is this: one of the reasons that some allopaths have a tough time figuring out what to make of osteopathic medicine is because often the message coming from osteopaths is a little contradictory.

"The MD and DO training are completely comparable. DO training is identical to MD with the addition of some OMM." You hear this a lot from folks. It seems perfectly logical. I buy it. But you also hear lots of DO's saying "DO training focuses more on the whole patient than MD training. DO training emphasizes the patient more than the illness, compared to MD training." You hear that a lot, too. But the second is in opposition to the first. The training is either identical or different. We hear both.

Another set of contradictions is "Osteopathic schools and allopathic schools have comparable applicants. Why, look at the MCAT/GPA average at (insert DO school) and look at the averages at (insert MD school). We have comparable applicants." Those numbers don't mean a whole lot to me regardless, but that's cool. But you also hear a lot of "Osteopathic schools have lower scores because we look for the 'whole applicant'". Again, this contradicts the first statement. Osteopathic schools are either comparable in testing ability of allopathic schools or they're not. And the idea that allopathic schools don't look for the whole applicant can leave folks feeling a little insulted as well. And, frankly, untrue. Personally, my stats were below the norm for my medical school; they just liked my story.

I support osteopathic medicine because I've worked with and been treated by too many good osteopaths to view them as inferior in any way.
.

.

 

[DocArmy]

OP,

At the end of the day, something like 40% of .mil docs are DO's. They can't discriminate against ~half of their docs.

If you want to do something competitive, rock the USMLE and rock the COMLEX and you can do whatever you want. The rest is just egocentric bs on both sides.

 

[wingbowlchamp3]

One thing I will say is this: one of the reasons that some allopaths have a tough time figuring out what to make of osteopathic medicine is because often the message coming from osteopaths is a little contradictory.

i'm a pcom grad. and i have a tough time figuring out what to make of osteopathic medicine. the hardest part about studying for my step III is i haven't thought about half the stuff since i start internship. i did an omm morning report just to get into that mindset...and because i'd never seen an osteopathic morning report even at pcom residencies.

you did a nice job of pointing out some of the dumbest things dos say. the idea that we treat the whole patient while mds don't is insulting to mds. we also don't have the guts to actually use all our omm knowledge...which makes us equal to mds even though we're learning all the allopathic topics plus the osteopathic topics.

 

[hippuppy]

Doesn't matter. The selection board doesn't take this into account with the military selection. Don't worry about it. Just get some published research, do the best on your COMLEX exams as you can and personally get in touch with the program director of the program of your choice.

R/

hippuppy