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.
