Osteopathic medicine must move towards the mainstream.

[Adapt]

I know this issue has been discussed before, but I will present it here again just because.

Many people have tried to argue that osteopathic medicine is becoming less unique and more like allopathic medicine. Some people say this loss of distinction is bad for the osteopathic profession as a whole.

I say it can only be good. Osteopathic medicine should become more and more like allopathic medicine to allow it to become mainstream. It is only after this merger is complete that DOs will become more accepted in the public eye and lose the stigma that may still exist in some parts of the US.

More DOs should enter into allopathic residencies and more DOs should teach in allopathic schools. The law for the 5 states that require an osteopathic internship should be abolished. The AOA must spread the word about DOs more.

This move toward the mainstream will help DOs gain full practice rights in more foreign countries. If the trend continues, more and more qualified premeds will look toward osteopathic medicine as a viable alternative to allopathic medicine.

I don't see how DOs or future DOs would want to preserve the "uniqueness" of the philosophy. After all, DOs will always have OMM which in itself makes them unique. That does not mean they should stay distinct from allopathic medicine. To gain more acceptance, osteopathic medicine must move towards the mainstream.

This concludes my DO rant. That is all.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dr JPH]

How is osteopathic medicine NOT mainstream?

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by JPHazelton
How is osteopathic medicine NOT mainstream?

Ok I guess I should have clarified that in the subject title. It should keep moving towards the mainstream. Many people say it should be distinct and separate from allopathic medicine. I believe it should not be.

 

[DD214_DOC]

Originally posted by Slickness
Ok I guess I should have clarified that in the subject title. It should keep moving towards the mainstream. Many people say it should be distinct and separate from allopathic medicine. I believe it should not be.

Then why even have it? If osteomathic medicine moves any closer to mainstream medicine, then people will question its existence.

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by JKDMed
Then why even have it? If osteomathic medicine moves any closer to mainstream medicine, then people will question its existence.

Even if its existence is questioned, I do not believe that osteopathic medicine will ever disappear. If anything it will merge with allopathic medicine and as such would continue to exist in a different way. However, I do not believe this merger would happen anytime soon.

OMM will always be unique to DOs and I don't think MD schools would ever adapt this technique into their curriculum.

 

[DORoe]

Then why even have it? If osteomathic medicine moves any closer to mainstream medicine, then people will question its existence.

Agreed. We need to be different than our MD counterparts. While you do make some good points I fail to see the benefit of just becoming another MD school. You bring up the question of foreign practice and the osteopathic intership which I think will eventually fade. I think what we need to do instead is continue to be visable, continue to lobby, and continue to educate.

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by DORoe
Agreed. We need to be different than our MD counterparts.

Yet with every year passing DOs are almost exactly like their MD counterparts. They hardly use OMM and interact with patients the same way as MDs do. For all intents and purposes, DOs and MDs are the same.

My argument is that it is good, and DOs should continue to strive toward this equality if you will.

 

[Docgeorge]

I think that as more and more literature comes out about OMT and you have evidence to back up that it truly does work, more and more MD schools will start to teach it. I think that it is at this point that it will become really difficult for us to tout our uniqueness. And before some one goes on to say that OMT alone does not an osteopath make, I need them to anwser what else defines an osteopathic physician?

This thing about the osteopathic philosophy of putting patients first and the disease second which may have been novel and unique in the late 19th centuray and most of the twenth is, belive after having disscussions with numerouse friends at allo schools is not so uniqe to osteopaths anymore. My friends are taugt to work up their patients the same way as I'm being taut.

I guess the real quandry for me is that most of the way through my fist year as an Osteopathic Medical Student I dont know what makes us diffent from allopaths if you take away the OMT.

Sorry if this is a little incoherant but it's almost 5am and I havent slept.

 

[Echinoidea]

I'm an incoming DO student, with admittedly little first-hand knowledge of osteopathic medicine in practice, but, I do feel that some of these steps might lead to more acceptance:

1. Accredation of all the DO schools by the LCME.

2. The AOA should have a voice in the AMA.

3. Elimination of the COMLEX. Osteopathic grads and Allopathic grads should take the same liscensing exam, with perhaps a supplemental section for OMT.

4. Merging of osteoapthic and allopathic residencies, with a uniform standard.

5. One freakin 30 sec. commercial during 'ER' on Thursday night about DO's.

I know, I'm a dreamer. And I'll probably get flamed by others far more along in their education for my lack of experience - I realize I'm not even an MS1 yet. Maybe my opinions will change later on.

 

[Buster Douglas]

Originally posted by Echinoidea
1. Accredation of all the DO schools by the LCME.

2. The AOA should have a voice in the AMA.

3. Elimination of the COMLEX. Osteopathic grads and Allopathic grads should take the same liscensing exam, with perhaps a supplemental section for OMT.

4. Merging of osteoapthic and allopathic residencies, with a uniform standard.

5. One freakin 30 sec. commercial during 'ER' on Thursday night about DO's.

I agree with 1, 2, 3, and 4.

 

[Eyecon82]

While shadowing a DO in a practice with 4 other MD's this past summer, I found no difference. Also, when I originally asked the DO to start shadowing, I told her that I also wanted to see how DO's differ than their MD counterparts in their practice. She bluntly told me that I would find no difference. She also said she found out that its not fair that DO's get accredited for their bedside manner....

basically it comes down to this....there are 2 diff types of physicians....doesnt matter which one you are....in tthe end you are going to be the same unless you specialize in OMM

 

[Chrisobean]

i just think that since the AOA loves to exemplify the differences between osteopathic and allopathic medicine, the public does not fully understand that much of the 2 fields is exactly the same. i feel MD will probably always be seen as the "gold standard" simply because it has been around longer and is more well known (I think the AMA is doing a good job of that!). so by saying osteopathic medicine has a different "philosophy" or differs in practice, it makes DO's sound like the lesser doctor. i'm not sure if merging the 2 is the answer, and i doubt that will happen simply because of the long and hard battle fought by DO's up until now... but i think more public education is in order (dont ask me how to do that, though)

 

[raptor5]

5. One freakin 30 sec. commercial during 'ER' on Thursday night about DO's.

How about a DO on ER, Scrubs, or any other show that has physicians on it. I think a good move for the AOA is to lobby Hollywood to include some of these subtle things to push DO's into a more accepted position. Lets be honest TV influences and dictates many peoples lives. What if years ago it was Doogy Howser D.O. (spelling)?

Raptor5

 

[PublicHealth]

One of the medical advisors for the TV show ER was a D.O. He also appeared in several episodes, usually wearing pink scrubs! I'm not sure if he still has this position, though. I remember seeing the credits roll by and it said his name followed by "D.O."

What distinguishes osteopathic medical training from allopathic medical training is OMT and "osteopathic principles." Sadly, only a small percentage of D.O.'s pursue postgraduate training in OMT, and the proportion of D.O.'s who actually use OMT in practice is not very high. So we're left with "osteopathic principles." The following two articles describe how practicing D.O.'s and osteopathic medical schools are trying to distinguish themselves from their allopathic counterparts:

J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003 Jul;103(7):313-8.

Do osteopathic physicians differ in patient interaction from allopathic physicians? An empirically derived approach.

Carey TS, Motyka TM, Garrett JM, Keller RB.

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Medicine, USA. [email protected]

Colleges of osteopathic medicine teach osteopathic principles, which provide a different approach to and interaction with patients than principles taught in allopathic medical schools. The authors examined whether osteopathic primary care physicians' interactions with patients reflect the principles of osteopathic medicine when compared with allopathic physicians' interactions. The principles of osteopathic medicine were adapted to elements that could be measured from an audio recording. This 26-item index was refined with two focus groups of practicing osteopathic physicians. Fifty-four patient visits to 11 osteopathic and 7 allopathic primary care physicians in Maine for screening physicals, headache, low back pain, and hypertension were recorded on audiotape and were dual-abstracted. When the 26-item index of osteopathic principles was summed, the osteopathic physicians had consistently higher scores (11 vs. 6.9; P = .01) than allopathic physicians, and visit length was similar (22 minutes vs. 20 minutes, respectively). Twenty-three of the 26 items were used more commonly by the osteopathic physicians. Osteopathic physicians were more likely than allopathic physicians to use patients' first names; explain etiologic factors to patients; and discuss social, family, and emotional impact of illnesses. In this study, osteopathic physicians were easily distinguishable from allopathic physicians by their verbal interactions with patients. Future studies should replicate this finding as well as determine whether it correlates with patient outcomes and satisfaction.



Acad Med. 2003 Nov;78(11):1144-8.

How private colleges of osteopathic medicine reinvented themselves.

Cummings M.

Statewide Campus System, Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA. [email protected]

Starting in the last decade of the 20th century, private colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) began to restructure themselves in ways that represent a distinct departure from the past. Their new organizational model de-emphasizes many of the characteristics that distinguish allopathic medical schools today. The new emphasis centers on high enrollment, diversity of health-related programs, formation of universities of health science, expansion, and a retreat from involvement in clinical and postdoctoral education. Such changes reflect an admixture of entrepreneurship, an ability to respond quickly to changing environments, and an insularity that draws them away from traditional forms of clinical and postdoctoral medical education. The private COMs carved out their own niche in medical education and created a new model compatible with their institutional strengths and weaknesses and related to their economic, educational, and human resources. As an evolving educational model, the private COMs have undergone a remarkable transformation in a brief period; they bear watching for future developments and to assess their long-term viability.

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by Echinoidea
I'm an incoming DO student, with admittedly little first-hand knowledge of osteopathic medicine in practice, but, I do feel that some of these steps might lead to more acceptance:

1. Accredation of all the DO schools by the LCME.

2. The AOA should have a voice in the AMA.

3. Elimination of the COMLEX. Osteopathic grads and Allopathic grads should take the same liscensing exam, with perhaps a supplemental section for OMT.

4. Merging of osteoapthic and allopathic residencies, with a uniform standard.

5. One freakin 30 sec. commercial during 'ER' on Thursday night about DO's.

I know, I'm a dreamer. And I'll probably get flamed by others far more along in their education for my lack of experience - I realize I'm not even an MS1 yet. Maybe my opinions will change later on.

Those are all great ideas. I particularly agree with 3 and 4. There should be only one standardized test and the two types of residencies should merge.

Maybe we will see this in our lifetime.

 

[haldane3]

A lot of people mention ER and Scrubs, but why is it i never see D.O.s on Trauma: Life in the ER on TLC? Or other shows much closer to educational/reality subject matter. That concerns me more than seeing D.O.s in a drama like ER...

 

[Echinoidea]

Originally posted by haldane3
A lot of people mention ER and Scrubs, but why is it i never see D.O.s on Trauma: Life in the ER on TLC? Or other shows much closer to educational/reality subject matter. That concerns me more than seeing D.O.s in a drama like ER...

There was a DO on Trauma a few weeks ago - he was a surgeon at a program in Las Vegas, I think... And I can remember seeing an EM resident who was a DO on another episode.

 

[Robz]

Originally posted by Echinoidea
There was a DO on Trauma a few weeks ago - he was a surgeon at a program in Las Vegas, I think... And I can remember seeing an EM resident who was a DO on another episode.

MUHAHAHAHAH. I watch these shows a lot....and just for fun I always look at the name on the coat.

I can't ever tell most of the time. Then you get the one with Dr. Soandso written on their coat and there is no way to know.

I just find it funny that I tend to look for that now.

 

[that dr. jack]

good posts slickness, and everyone else!

all of the above ideas are wonderful. i was wondering why ER has a D.O. as consultant, and shows some FMGs but no D.O.s yet.

there are more D.O.s practicing than ever before, and we WILL be noticed by showing our patients both how we are equal to our allopathic counterparts in terms of being "real and full" doctors, yet how we can (if we choose individually) give them some unique and useful treatments. if they just want the standard treatment, we can do that, but also we're there if they want OMM.

i want to allay a patient's fears and misconceptions with compassion, integrity and open-minded approaches to their health problems. showing our patients precisely the excellent care they can get from an osteopathic physician is the best advertisement we could ask for. more exposure would be great, but i'm not going to rely soley on the AOA to make people want me to be their physician.

it's also a good idea to get rid of any bitterness about not being an M.D.
face it: we all know that some go D.O. only because they didn't get into any M.D. schools, and may harbor resentment and have an inferiority complex about it. it colors the way you present yourself and how you feel about being a physician. I know a great orthopaedic surgeon who is a D.O., but he also calls them "Osteoquacks" and talks about how crappy the profession is. let's be proud of ourselves and not make our whole profession an issue of us vs. the allopaths.

 

[PublicHealth]

We can't forget that D.O.'s represent only 6% of the total physician population. That means that if you randomly sample 100 physicians, 94 will be M.D.s and only 6 will be D.O.'s (this varies geographically). There are also 125 schools offering the M.D. degree and only 20 offering the D.O. degree. Clearly, numbers are not (yet) in favor of osteopathic medicine. However, some D.O. schools churn out hundreds of graduates each year, so that may bump that 6% figure into double digits in the next decade or so. Time will tell what that will do for the visibility of osteopathic medicine in the general public.

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by PublicHealth
We can't forget that D.O.'s represent only 6% of the total physician population. That means that if you randomly sample 100 physicians, 94 will be M.D.s and only 6 will be D.O.'s (this varies geographically). There are also 125 schools offering the M.D. degree and only 20 offering the D.O. degree. Clearly, numbers are not (yet) in favor of osteopathic medicine. However, some D.O. schools churn out hundreds of graduates each year, so that may bump that 6% figure into double digits in the next decade or so. Time will tell what that will do for the visibility of osteopathic medicine in the general public.

This is true. I am not sure if the number will ever get into double digits just simply looking at the math.

Roughly 16,000 enter into US MD schools each year while about 2,500 enter into US DO schools each year. Through enough time with older physicians dying off, given these numbers, an equilibrium would be reached with DOs making up about 13.5% of the physicians in this country.

However, these numbers don't include the number of FMGs. Every year, about 25% of allopathic residencies are filled by FMGs. These FMGs have the MD degree so they dramatically increase the number of MDs in addition to the 16,000 already in the US.

Thus, even if more DO schools pop up adding 200 graduates here and there, DOs will never make it into the double digit percentages of all physicians due to the influx of FMGs.

 

[Shinken]

Frankly, I think where osteopathic medicine is right now isn't such a bad place at all.

Is there a stigma? Yes. Do I care? No.

Do people know much about DO's? No. Do I care? No. It's not important except for ego purposes. I haven't heard of a DO being unemployed because no patients go see him/her.

The profession has had a tremendous history of survival. The osteopathic hospitals that were created way back when and the schools that opened up in the beginning of osteopathy were almost exclusively funded via private funds (donations from the public and from osteopathic physicians).

I believe we must remain separate, if not by philosophy at least by approach (integrate more OMT in practice, spend more time with patients, etc.). Becoming just like allopathic medicine doesn't make sense, because the profession would effectively disappear.

Right now we have achieved legal and professional equality, but I think what the profession needs more than publicity is:

1) Quality osteopathic residencies for every graduate.

2) Higher standards of admission, even for non-trads.

3) More productive research.

 

[MacGyver]

You guys are pushing a dangerous precedent. We dont need any new medical schools period. That includes both MD and DO schools.

By trying to outnumber MD graduates, you are going to drive down salaries for all of us. Is that what you want? Sure, you might achieve equivalent perception as MDs, but at what cost? Thats not worth taking a 50% paycut because you thought it was necessary to build 30 new DO schools to try and outnumber the MDs.

DOs make just slightly less on average than MDs, cause more DOs go into lower paying primary care fields. DOs have no problem getting patients. Its not as if no patients will go to DOs because they think they are inferior.

Yet you guys want to push your luck, just so a ****ing TV show called ER, which nobody watches anyways, will show more DOs on the episodes? Give me a break.

If you want to remove all prejudice against DOs and be mentioned in the same frequency and get the same exposure as MDs, you'd have to build at least 50 new DO schools.

Of course, when you do that, the market saturates and you can expect to see your income drop by half. You really think thats a good tradeoff?

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by MacGyver
You guys are pushing a dangerous precedent. We dont need any new medical schools period. That includes both MD and DO schools.

By trying to outnumber MD graduates, you are going to drive down salaries for all of us. Is that what you want? Sure, you might achieve equivalent perception as MDs, but at what cost? Thats not worth taking a 50% paycut because you thought it was necessary to build 30 new DO schools to try and outnumber the MDs.

DOs make just slightly less on average than MDs, cause more DOs go into lower paying primary care fields. DOs have no problem getting patients. Its not as if no patients will go to DOs because they think they are inferior.

Yet you guys want to push your luck, just so a ****ing TV show called ER, which nobody watches anyways, will show more DOs on the episodes? Give me a break.

If you want to remove all prejudice against DOs and be mentioned in the same frequency and get the same exposure as MDs, you'd have to build at least 50 new DO schools.

Of course, when you do that, the market saturates and you can expect to see your income drop by half. You really think thats a good tradeoff?

I believe that FMGs who make up about 25% of allopathic residencies each year present a far larger problem to the saturation of the market that you speak of rather than a measely 200 or so more graduates that the new DO schools produce.

It's not like there's going to be popping up 20 more DO schools any time soon. Instead, you should be talking about the realistic problem that is occuring right now with the large numbers of foreign MDs coming into the US.

 

[MacGyver]

Hey I dont like the FMGs either, but thats still no excuse. We can control the number of FMGs from year to year. But when you build a new school, the cat is out of the bag and there is no going back. New schools become a permanent feature of the medical demand-supply scheme. We can always decide in any given year to drastically cut back on FMGs. We dont have the same control over new schools opening left and right.

There has been 1 new MD program the last 20 years, and at least 10 new DO programs the last 15 years, with 5 or 6 more on the way.

I cant believe the AOA has agreed to accredit all these new programs. They need to start excercising some restraint and make it clear that no new DO programs will be accredited for awhile.

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by MacGyver
We can control the number of FMGs from year to year. But when you build a new school, the cat is out of the bag and there is no going back. New schools become a permanent feature of the medical demand-supply scheme. We can always decide in any given year to drastically cut back on FMGs. We dont have the same control over new schools opening left and right.

Exactly, we can control the number of FMGs. Thus, new DO programs should continue to increase and produce more DO graduates. As the number of DOs grows, the number of FMGs should lessen and should be controlled.

Sounds good to me. After all, DOs are US med school graduates and the government should look after their own before they look after FMGs.

 

[Goofyone]

[rant]

I'd like to make some points.

First, on recognition:

Do you guys know the difference between being popular and being admired? I'd rather be known by less and liked by more.

For Osteopathic physicians to stand out, it's not our numbers that need to increase, but our contribution to medicine.

I've got to tell you, I don't really know much about how to go about this, but there is one thing that the Osteopathic profession needs: better GME. The road to that is through academics, namely, generating good research. We don't generate enough research (and many schools frankly don't care) to be seen as making any meaningful contributions to medicine. There definitely needs to be more university and large hospital affilliation to get that kind of funding--no easy task.

I am going to put this in all caps because this is a wakeup call:

WE CANNOT RIDE THE COATTAILS OF M.D.s IF WE WANT TO BE SEEN AS DISTINCTIVE.......but that's exactly what we've been doing. Most of our evidence-based medicine is derived from MD research. Half of our residencies are MD. HELLOOOO!!!!

Second, I have to ask the question that I've asked twice now and nobody has been able to answer me: what happens if we're not distinct? Why can't two virtually identical types of medical education coexist?"

I have to address something that some of you have been saying: that we must push this OMM issue to retain our distinctiveness.

IF WE ARE PUSHING OMM ONLY TO RETAIN OUR DISTINCTIVNESS THEN WE ARE DOING A DISSERVICE TO OUR PATIENTS.

We should be using treatments because they work, not as a freaking visibility issue. Instead of comparing ourselves to MDs to "make sure we are distinct," why don't we just worry about ourselves instead? If that leads us to practice like MDs (which we already do anyway) WHO CARES, as long as we are all "doing it right?" If we admit that the benefits of manipulation are overstated, what are the consequences of that? Are the 20 osteopathic medical schools just going to vanish into thin air? Let me tell you baby, IT AINT GONNA COME FROM PUBLIC OUTCRY. How many patients even know the difference between a NP and a physician? I have friends who are nurses that don't have a CLUE as to the training we have to endure. If people in the health profession are clueless as to this issue, what do you think patients care about distinctiveness? The only thing the patient cares about is whether we're doing everything we can for them. DO that right, and we have nothing to worry about.

Perhaps I just don't "get it." Maybe someone can explain it to me. What is everyone so afraid of?

Finally, I have to address something that some of you have been saying:

1. Accredation of all the DO schools by the LCME.

-interesting thought

2. The AOA should have a voice in the AMA.

-actually people, the AMA has offered their hand to the AOA, and the AOA slapeth that hand away.

3. Elimination of the COMLEX. Osteopathic grads and Allopathic grads should take the same liscensing exam, with perhaps a supplemental section for OMT.

-again, a money maker put in place by the powers that be.

4. Merging of osteoapthic and allopathic residencies, with a uniform standard.

-there goes your precious distinctiveness

5. One freakin 30 sec. commercial during 'ER' on Thursday night about DO's.

-this is an asinine idea. If you want respect, then advertising like some sort of a used car salesman isn't the way to do it!!!!!!!!

[/end rant]

 

[Echinoidea]

Originally posted by Goofyone
[rant]

-this is an asinine idea. If you want respect, then advertising like some sort of a used car salesman isn't the way to do it!!!!!!!!

[/end rant]

Asinine? Chill out!

 

[bigmuny]

Originally posted by Goofyone
[rant]

I'd like to make some points.

First, on recognition:

Do you guys know the difference between being popular and being admired? I'd rather be known by less and liked by more.

For Osteopathic physicians to stand out, it's not our numbers that need to increase, but our contribution to medicine.

I've got to tell you, I don't really know much about how to go about this, but there is one thing that the Osteopathic profession needs: better GME. The road to that is through academics, namely, generating good research. We don't generate enough research (and many schools frankly don't care) to be seen as making any meaningful contributions to medicine. There definitely needs to be more university and large hospital affilliation to get that kind of funding--no easy task.

I am going to put this in all caps because this is a wakeup call:

WE CANNOT RIDE THE COATTAILS OF M.D.s IF WE WANT TO BE SEEN AS DISTINCTIVE.......but that's exactly what we've been doing. Most of our evidence-based medicine is derived from MD research. Half of our residencies are MD. HELLOOOO!!!!

Second, I have to ask the question that I've asked twice now and nobody has been able to answer me: what happens if we're not distinct? Why can't two virtually identical types of medical education coexist?"

I have to address something that some of you have been saying: that we must push this OMM issue to retain our distinctiveness.

IF WE ARE PUSHING OMM ONLY TO RETAIN OUR DISTINCTIVNESS THEN WE ARE DOING A DISSERVICE TO OUR PATIENTS.

We should be using treatments because they work, not as a freaking visibility issue. Instead of comparing ourselves to MDs to "make sure we are distinct," why don't we just worry about ourselves instead? If that leads us to practice like MDs (which we already do anyway) WHO CARES, as long as we are all "doing it right?" If we admit that the benefits of manipulation are overstated, what are the consequences of that? Are the 20 osteopathic medical schools just going to vanish into thin air? Let me tell you baby, IT AINT GONNA COME FROM PUBLIC OUTCRY. How many patients even know the difference between a NP and a physician? I have friends who are nurses that don't have a CLUE as to the training we have to endure. If people in the health profession are clueless as to this issue, what do you think patients care about distinctiveness? The only thing the patient cares about is whether we're doing everything we can for them. DO that right, and we have nothing to worry about.

Perhaps I just don't "get it." Maybe someone can explain it to me. What is everyone so afraid of?

Finally, I have to address something that some of you have been saying:

1. Accredation of all the DO schools by the LCME.

-interesting thought

2. The AOA should have a voice in the AMA.

-actually people, the AMA has offered their hand to the AOA, and the AOA slapeth that hand away.

3. Elimination of the COMLEX. Osteopathic grads and Allopathic grads should take the same liscensing exam, with perhaps a supplemental section for OMT.

-again, a money maker put in place by the powers that be.

4. Merging of osteoapthic and allopathic residencies, with a uniform standard.

-there goes your precious distinctiveness

5. One freakin 30 sec. commercial during 'ER' on Thursday night about DO's.

-this is an asinine idea. If you want respect, then advertising like some sort of a used car salesman isn't the way to do it!!!!!!!!

[/end rant]

Absolutely brilliant and insightful post.

 

[Goofyone]

Originally posted by Echinoidea
Asinine? Chill out!

Sorry to sound so harsh, but I feel very strongly about this. We are physicians, not ginsu knife salesmen! I sincerely believe that advertising on television would actually demean not only the osteopathic profession, but healthcare in general. If we have to advertise, this says to me *as a patient* that physicians are more about business than altruism. With the way people are both lawsuit crazy and obsessed with "natural" therapies, this could only make matters worse.

 

[Adapt]

Originally posted by Goofyone
Sorry to sound so harsh, but I feel very strongly about this. We are physicians, not ginsu knife salesmen! I sincerely believe that advertising on television would actually demean not only the osteopathic profession, but healthcare in general. If we have to advertise, this says to me *as a patient* that physicians are more about business than altruism. With the way people are both lawsuit crazy and obsessed with "natural" therapies, this could only make matters worse.

Not necessarily. If it was a straightforward commercial with the AOA president discussing a short version of what osteopathy is as well as how it relates to medicine, then it can only help.

Presenting it in such a fashion as to explain a concept rather than saying "Go to us" is not a sales pitch but rather an informative commercial. If it merely pointed out what osteopathy is, then I really don't see how it could be that bad.

 

[Goofyone]

Originally posted by Slickness
Not necessarily. If it was a straightforward commercial with the AOA president discussing a short version of what osteopathy is as well as how it relates to medicine, then it can only help.

Presenting it in such a fashion as to explain a concept rather than saying "Go to us" is not a sales pitch but rather an informative commercial. If it merely pointed out what osteopathy is, then I really don't see how it could be that bad.

I dunno. I see your point, but television advertisement somehow "cheapens" the whole thing for me.

Personally, I would NEVER go to a doctor than has to advertise on television. If an entire profession did this I would think twice about that profession.

Not to mention there is really no good reason to advertise. I don't know of any DOs hard-up for finding patients. The people that seek out DOs already know the difference, and I have a feeling that the people that don't will just perceive advertisement to be a sign of quackery.

Reasonable people will surely disagree, but I have a feeling I'm not alone on this.

 

[Echinoidea]

I see what you mean, Goofyone. Now that I think about it, there is nothing more distasteful than ambulance-chasing lawyer ads on TV. An older lawyer once told me that the prestige of practicing law went down the toilet once the American Bar Assn. ruled that is was acceptable to solicit and advertise for clients.

I'd hate for medicine to become that commercialized. Point taken. You've swayed me.

 

[Chrisobean]

anyone from the NY area knows Dr Zizmor... the dermatologist (md) on park avenue. his commercials used to be on all the time, and now he has big print ads on the subways. he has chaged so many people's lives, i want him to be my doctor! lol.... he also makes it quite clear which credit cards he takes, but he has a fabulous payment plan availabe.
definitely NOT the way i want people to hear about my services...

 

[that dr. jack]

Originally posted by Echinoidea
I see what you mean, Goofyone. Now that I think about it, there is nothing more distasteful than ambulance-chasing lawyer ads on TV. An older lawyer once told me that the prestige of practicing law went down the toilet once the American Bar Assn. ruled that is was acceptable to solicit and advertise for clients.

I'd hate for medicine to become that commercialized. Point taken. You've swayed me.

I agree too.

 

[DORoe]

Sorry to sound so harsh, but I feel very strongly about this. We are physicians, not ginsu knife salesmen! I sincerely believe that advertising on television would actually demean not only the osteopathic profession, but healthcare in general.

I agree there is a medical school (MD) that advertises itself on TV often here. It seems really cheesy and makes me question the doctors that graduate from there.

 

[MacGyver]

Originally posted by DORoe
I agree there is a medical school (MD) that advertises itself on TV often here. It seems really cheesy and makes me question the doctors that graduate from there.

I find that hard to believe. Give me the name of this school.

And what do you mean by advertisement? Are you saying they are encouraging people to apply? Or are they just talking about how good their research is and all that bull****.

 

[DORoe]

MacGyver i sent you a PM

 

[raspberry swirl]

Originally posted by Chrisobean
anyone from the NY area knows Dr Zizmor... the dermatologist (md) on park avenue. his commercials used to be on all the time, and now he has big print ads on the subways.

HA. i used to stare at those freakin ads all the time on the subway. too funny . . .

 

[Goofyone]

Originally posted by Echinoidea
Point taken. You've swayed me.

HOLY MOLY. That is definitely the first time I've ever heard that on SDN! (and maybe my entire life for that matter)

But seriously, everytime I think of doctors advertising, I think of that show Nip/Tuck (which is an awesome show, by the way) and how that funny-looking, crazy-haired plastic surgeon has billboards all over.

 

[_456]

OSU-COM TV Commericals:

http://www.healthsciences.okstate.edu/osumed_tvspots.htm

 

[Adapt]

I remember seeing while on a subway train in Chicago an ad of a physician treating a child. In large print it said, "DOs, doctors treating patients and not just symptoms."

I thought the add was effective yet not too strong to the point of trying to sell something. If more ads like this were in magazines and the like then I think that would be great for osteopathic medicine.

 

[vrazz]

"I don't see how DOs or future DOs would want to preserve the "uniqueness" of the philosophy. After all, DOs will always have OMM which in itself makes them unique. "

Ok - I agree that in clinical practice, it is hard to tell the difference between DO and MD. However, there is more of a difference between the two styles of medicine than OMT. Anyone who has interviewed at a DO school ought to know that! There is a difference in philosophy (at least, unless allopathic schools have changed thier way of thinking, but I can't speak to that) in that DO's have a whole patient approach to medicine, and that they place an emphasis on health rather than illness.

In response to other things I've seen posted here:

1. I think advertising on TV is an absolutly awful idea. Let's put it this way - if you are injured in an accident, are you going to call Sam Bernstein or any of the other quack lawyers who advertise on TV? No. You'll find a reputable one who dosn't need to fish for clients.

2. To the D.O.'s out there who are out there practicing and badmouthing your colleagues ('osteoquacks' and the like)...get out. You don't deserve the degree, and you are doing a disservice to the entire medical profession. We get it. You're bitter. Get a life.

3. To students who are going D.O. because they couldn't get into MD school - see above. Also, please recognize and respect that there are subtle differences between the two schools of medicine, and either embrace them or wait another year and reapply to MD school.

 

[Buster Douglas]

Originally posted by _456
OSU-COM TV Commericals:

http://www.healthsciences.okstate.edu/osumed_tvspots.htm

I laughed... I cried...
Just touching...

 

[MacGyver]

Those OSU COM TV commercials are nothing new. They are trying to draw patients to the medical center, which a lot of places do.

I have a serious problem with specific medical SCHOOLS advertising though. I have never heard of a medical school doing a commercial.

I also have a problem with MDs or DOs advertising crap like hair replacement or some bogus ointment that falls under natural supplement status by the FDA and therefore doesnt have to prove any scientific effect.

 

[MacGyver]

Originally posted by Slickness
I remember seeing while on a subway train in Chicago an ad of a physician treating a child. In large print it said, "DOs, doctors treating patients and not just symptoms."

that is such bull****. It has nothing to do with MD vs DO and everything to do with your particular doctor.

 

[oceandoc]

I went to undergrad at a highly-ranked, little-known engineering-heavy small school on the east coast...during my junior year they launched a big huge ad campaign (yes, with commercials, including radio commercials...it was terrible) The entire campus was absolutley furious for all the same reasons that have been mentioned previously. There was a huge student backlash against the administration and the PR people...I was definately part of it, as I was pissed off with the rest of them.

You know what? The ads worked. People who had never heard of my school before the ad campaign actually come up to me and to say that they didn't realize what a good school it was but now they did and blah blah blah. Application #'s went up, etc etc. Of course, commercials weren't all that the PR people did, but they actually did help somewhat.

So, should the AOA put out commercials? Maybe. Think about how schools put ads on TV during the games when their basketball teams are in the playoffs...does it cheapen Duke to plug itself during the final four? I don't really think so. Would the AOA putting commericals on during ER or scrubs have a similar effect? Again, maybe. However, something's got to happen. If something didn't need to be done this thread wouldn't exist.

This article makes an interesting point, sort of: http://my.webmd.com/content/article/14/1668_50153.htm?lastselectedguid={5FE84E90-BC77-4056-A91C-9531713CA348}

I personally would like to see a change in the language that the media uses when it talks about medical stuff. MD is commonly used as a synonom for physician in written articles, and, frankly, as a future DO this pisses me off. I think that we, as students, could launch a letter writing campaign or something similar to change this. Interestingly, though, when I mentioned this plan to a friend of mine from college who wrote to me just to tell me that his doc is a DO, he had this to say: "I didn't realize there was so much confusion over MD vs DO? Granted, I assumed my doctor was an MD, but I never doubted that he was a doctor. Nonetheless, and the revelation that he's a DO doesn't change anything.
Are DOs frowned upon in the medical community? You indicated a
public confusion over the matter, but I'd hope that, at least internally, you
are all seen as peers."

Osteopathic medicine isn't what it was in 1887. The fact that DO students in 2004 can't easily define what they are doing in a quick bathroom-line conversation and that DOs themselves will put down the degree shows that there is a serious problem somewhere that the AOA needs to address, and they need to address it now.

 

[subtlewonder]

q

 

[calcrew14]

How would DOs express/introduce themselves nowadays? Is it going to be the continuation of the same old theme or a trial of some brand new experimental idea? Either way, the attempt may not make any difference. It's been over a century already that a group of doctors appear to have alienated themselves at home.

During the quest for better medicine back in the old days, was there any single evidence that those pioneering DOs went astray too far from their home? Even they did invent the OMM, the practice could still be considered within a scope of (very conservative) medicine, nothing more than a back to the basics trip. It was hardly a unigue event at all. Rather, just one of possible breakthrough during the infancy of this subsequent modern medicine.

What is allopathic medicine anyway? So far that DO enthusiasts have been preaching a lot of osteopathic medicine, I haven't heard their MD counterparts discussing allopathic medicine yet. Is it possible that there are many MDs who are not too familiar with that term at all? If so, this belief that all MDs being allopathic physician may only be as good as another inaccurate assumption.
Sometimes I can't help thinking that DOs are the only entity that recognizes allopathic medicine!

How does anybody know exactly what is the allopathic medicine anyway? It could be something that has been out of date for several decades already. Things in medical field have constantly changed for the better all the time. The conventional allopathy that someone knew back in the old days may have completely transformed beyond recognition. What is left unchanged is this traditional feud that will last until somebody can find a way to stop the rain.

I have just googled for some definition of "allopathic medicine" and here is the excerpt from an article that I found. It sounds so absurd that I don't think any medical school would preach it nowadays. Even automobile-mechanics know that they have to find out what is wrong before they can fix it:


"What is Allopathic Medicine?
It is the science of diagnosing, treating or preventing disease and other damage to the body or mind. It is a method of treating disease with remedies and protocols that produce effects different from those caused by the disease itself. The cause of the disease is not used in the cure of the disease. It is primarily the treatment of signs and symptoms that a patient presents to a doctor with. Doctors are initially trained in acute care and crisis intervention treatments and protocols (heart attacks, trauma, auto accidents, crisis stabilization etc.). This is where they really shine."

 

[bgreet]

oceandoc: Would that school happen to be Stevens?