podiatry is medical school

[347932]

Its interesting to read all the students' perspectives.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, as a PGY-1 at a medical school I was responsible for the care of my patients regardless of what rotation I was on. When I was on my ED Rotation, I was diagnosing and treating MI, CVAs, all levels of trauma (including PTSD)...etc. When I was on my FP rotation, I was diagnosing and treating all sorts of runny noses, SOB, flus...etc. During my Vascular Surgery Rotation I was primary assist on ruptured AAA and transplants and responsible to follow these patients post op in the ICUs and such. They didn't care that I was not an MD. I was a resident and offered them extra hands and an extra brain to pick.

If you think an Internist is going to treat SOB and Chest pain primarily rather than send it out to a Cardiologist, you're kidding yourself. I had a hypertensive crisis and ended up in the hospital because of it. My PCP took care of my BP, but when they found out I had kidney damage from it, she sent me right to a Nephrologist. MY PCP didn't want to touch that with a ten foot pole.

What all of you are glossing over is we are all TEAM. One helps the other. No one is better than the other. Without one, the other won't be as successful.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[janV88]

"Yes, a Physician but which specialties? Do opthalmologists see acutely ill patients?"

What he is saying is that because an opthalmologist attending medical school they technically would have the knowledge to assess them without putting their foot in their mouth HA HA...

So newly graduated med students have the all knowledge necessary to treat patients? Thats a slap in the face for all the BC FM, IM, EM, etc physicians out there LOL.


We should all listen to kidsfeet and all the other attendings on SDN. They have been there and done that and they know what its like in the real world.

 

[karizma098]

I dont know why you brought this up but ok.



Yes, a Physician but which specialties? Do opthalmologists see acutely ill patients?



show me a Psychiatrist treating an eye infection and I will show you a lawsuit.



So are Podiatrists.



That option diminishes/ends once you match, unless of course you decide to re-enter the match and go to a different residency.



All Podiatrists are now required to be trained as surgeons.



I thought you said that residency training is where things matter? Once you enter a residency, your scope diminishes.



Let me know if any hospitals grant you any privileges or if that will hold up in court.

yes, that's what residents do.....i dont see why a court will be involved in the process.

i dont have the energy for a p*ssng contest. you're right, podiatrists are probably equally trained as we are to treat gunshot wounds and any other acute illnesses, and are essentially the same thing as a physician, with just another scope. this is why they go to medical school and have the same practice and prescriptions rights that physicians do.

oh wait. they don't.

we won't see eye to eye. there is a place for both specialties in the scope of health care, but as i said earlier, trying to justify your training as equivalent to that of a physician ( in scope of patient treatment ) - regardless what he/she chose to 'specialize' in, only makes you look like you're compensating. if you were equally trained, you would be a DO or and MD , not a DPM. Likewise, i don't have equivalent knowledge of the foot, hence i won't have a DPM. --case in point. beyond that, rationalize scope and education as much as you need to.

ps - i wholeheartedly agree with kidsfeet. it's all about working as a team - but its just stupid to me when people don't understand everyone has their own role; i'll go to a DPM for any foot or ankle issue i have, but i'd go to a physician for anything else.

 

[janV88]

yes, that's what residents do.....i dont see why a court will be involved in the process.

DPMs also have an unlimited scope of practice during residency. And unlimited prescription rights as long as it is within our scope of practice..meaning DPMs can prescribe anything as long as it is for the foot and ankle.

you're right, podiatrists are probably equally trained as we are to treat gunshot wounds and any other acute illnesses

That's not what I said AT ALL. You need to learn how to read.

we won't see eye to eye. there is a place for both specialties in the scope of health care, but as i said earlier, trying to justify your training as equivalent to that of a physician ( in scope of patient treatment ) - regardless what he/she chose to 'specialize' in, only makes you look like you're compensating. if you were equally trained, you would be a DO or and MD , not a DPM. Likewise, i don't have equivalent knowledge of the foot, hence i won't have a DPM. --case in point. beyond that, rationalize scope and education as much as you need to.

ps - i wholeheartedly agree with kidsfeet. it's all about working as a team - but its just stupid to me when people don't understand everyone has their own role; i'll go to a DPM for any foot or ankle issue i have, but i'd go to a physician for anything else.

There is no such thing as a general physician anymore. Everyone specializes. You will realize this sooner or later. There is no such thing as a physician that can practice the entire scope of medicine.


The point of my posts was that the real training is in residency and that, realistically speaking, Podiatrists are no different than a Physician who specializes. An Ophthalmologist does not do what an ER doc does and vice versa.

EDIT: For those who are wondering what a Podiatrist experiences during their 3 years of Podiatric Surgery Residency, check out this thread... http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=409888

A ton of stories in there from our past and present residents on SDN. It's a long thread so I picked out some random posts I found interesting.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=10124404&postcount=577

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=9472798&postcount=549

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=9548366&postcount=550

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=7574110&postcount=376

 

[Marcus X]

I think one of the issues here is that someone holding an MD or DO degree is allowed, by law, to prescribe ANY legally-prescribable substance, regardless of speciality or subspecialty. Some may feel more or less comfortable with certain substances, depending on their respective area of expertise, but, by law, they can write for whatever they want.

DPMs, DDSs, DMDs, etc. are allowed to prescribe substances within their scope only. The degree obtained limits their authority. It has nothing to do with residency training, specialty, or subspecialty.

 

[sideways]

There is no such thing as a general physician anymore. Everyone specializes. You will realize this sooner or later. There is no such thing as a physician that can practice the entire scope of medicine.


The point of my posts was that the real training is in residency and that, realistically speaking, Podiatrists are no different than any other Physician who specializes. An Ophthalmologist does not do what an ER doc does and vice versa.

Podiatrists aren't physicians bro. You might as well say Art historians are no different than any other Physician who specializes.

Let me ask you this, are you allowed, in all states, to advertise yourself as Dr. janV88 without including your degree at the end of your name? If the answer is no, which it is, then in the eyes of the law you aren't a physician. If you think that's unfair, then deal with it appropriately. But don't make **** up and get surprised when someone calls you on it.

 

[janV88]

I think one of the issues here is that someone holding an MD or DO degree is allowed, by law, to prescribe ANY legally-prescribable substance, regardless of speciality or subspecialty. Some may feel more or less comfortable with certain substances, depending on their respective area of expertise, but, by law, they can write for whatever they want.

DPMs, DDSs, DMDs, etc. are allowed to prescribe substances within their scope only. The degree obtained limits their authority. It has nothing to do with residency training, specialty, or subspecialty.

Well technically there is no "master list" of substances within the scope of the above mentioned degrees. The drug just has to be a treatment for a diagnosis that is within their scope of practice.

Podiatrists aren't physicians bro. You might as well say Art historians are no different than any other Physician who specializes.

Let me ask you this, are you allowed, in all states, to advertise yourself as Dr. janV88 without including your degree at the end of your name? If the answer is no, which it is, then in the eyes of the law you aren't a physician. If you think that's unfair, then deal with it appropriately. But don't make **** up and get surprised when someone calls you on it.

My bad, I actually had to read that a couple times cuz I didn't mean for that statement to say Podiatrists are Physicians. I personally don't care if you or anyone considers Podiatrists as Physicians. The reason we are pushing for that in all states is so that Podiatrists are reimbursed the same amount for procedures as Physicians are. It's an insurance thing.

No need to have such a over the top response and say I flip out when I get called out cuz if you read all of my posts...I never flip out when called out.

I have edited my post for you.

 

[sideways]

Well technically there is no "master list" of substances within the scope of the above mentioned degrees. The drug just has to be a treatment for a diagnosis that is within their scope of practice.



My bad, I actually had to read that a couple times cuz I didn't mean for that statement to say Podiatrists are Physicians. I personally don't care if you or anyone considers Podiatrists as Physicians. The reason we are pushing for that in all states is so that Podiatrists are reimbursed the same amount for procedures as Physicians are. It's an insurance thing.

No need to have such a over the top response and say I flip out when I get called out cuz if you read all of my posts...I never flip out when called out.

I have edited my post for you.

I'm not being over the top. It's just the way I talkype.

 

[FootDocStudent]

Dr House says: Let's make the podiatrist and the osteopath have the MD title! I personally met some podiatrists and osteopaths who diagnose better than allopathic MDs!

So, podiatrists should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Podiatric

Osteopaths should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Osteopathic

Allopaths should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Allopathic

Dentists should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Dental

And optometrists should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Optometric

I mean, they all perform history and physicals, prescribe the SAME medications, diagnose, and treat diseases/injuries by law and by profession. Hence, DOCTOR.

This way, everyone is happy: we are all MDs!

 

[stigmata]

Let me ask you this, are you allowed, in all states, to advertise yourself as Dr. janV88 without including your degree at the end of your name? If the answer is no, which it is, then in the eyes of the law you aren't a physician. If you think that's unfair, then deal with it appropriately. But don't make **** up and get surprised when someone calls you on it.

stupid point...as someone with a PhD in anything has this right, or a DVM

 

[sideways]

stupid point...as someone with a PhD in anything has this right, or a DVM

Wrong

 

[cbrons]

Dr House says: Let's make the podiatrist and the osteopath have the MD title! I personally met some podiatrists and osteopaths who diagnose better than allopathic MDs!

So, podiatrists should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Podiatric

Osteopaths should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Osteopathic

Allopaths should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Allopathic

Dentists should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Dental

And optometrists should have a diploma written this way:

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE
Optometric

I mean, they all perform history and physicals, prescribe the SAME medications, diagnose, and treat diseases/injuries by law and by profession. Hence, DOCTOR.

This way, everyone is happy: we are all MDs!

First DO doesn't = osteopath (in the modern sense of the word)

Second, optometrists and all the other ancillary professions listed above do not receive equivalent schooling and training where as DOs do (and not only claim they do, have shown that they do... Equivalent first time USMLE pass rate, many are in the same residency programs, curriculum is virtually the same except for the added OMM in DO schools, etc.

 

[stigmata]

Do not confuse media practices or medical staff BS with "legal". That is stupid.

 

[LovinMed]

"Yes, a Physician but which specialties? Do opthalmologists see acutely ill patients?"

What he is saying is that because an opthalmologist attending medical school they technically would have the knowledge to assess them without putting their foot in their mouth HA HA...

I think the key word here is "technically"

[/QUOTE]So in a podiatric residency you are trained to treat acute illness? isn't a residency specialized treament which in that case should concern with lower extremity issues?[/QUOTE]

This statement makes no sense... we have to be well rounded, and considering the fact that a good half of our residency is virtually identical to IM, of course we are treating acute illnesses of many varieties.

[/QUOTE]And as a pharm student I see often that some insurance companies will not cover certain medications due to scope of practice..So go ahead prescribe what ever you have that right but you're not fooling anyone...[/QUOTE]

This kind of quote is what really annoys me... Nobody is talking about trying to prescribe stuff that they shouldnt, and nobody is trying to fool anyone.. And if you are a pharm STUDENT, then I really dont believe you are seeing a lot of anything of this nature yet in your short career. So get off your high horse.

 

[MaseratiGT]

While some schools may share the first two years with DO students, after that, our paths diverge obtusely.

Pod students just don't do the same amount of IM rotations as 3rd years and sub-I's who are DOs and MDs. But medical students, (no offense intended), probably don't know how to fixate a proximal Akin.

So while yeah, a pod has an unlimited rx license within scope, and pod residents rotate through IM, and ER and all that, the nature of our education is inherently different.

Do I think we are physicians, yes...PODIATRIC physicians. Do I need to walk around inflating my ego telling everyone that? No. I'm a doc who treats feet, you're a doc who manages patients in a different way.

Do we go to medical school? As a first and second year, I remember that I too was adamant that I went to medical school. Now I go to podiatry school and if I do ever go to med school, it's PODIATRIC medical school.

While I don't entirely agree with all of the postings of the MD and DO students on these threads, I respect them because they know that we are the foot and ankle specialists, whether or not we went to medical school according to the MD/DO realm.

 

[347932]

Once again, interesting perspective by many students.

Please link the actual scope of practice language that says I "CAN'T" prescribe out of my scope of practice.

Its not a matter of whether I can or can't, its a matter of whether I should or should not. This is the case for ALL medical specialties. All of us CAN, but there are limits as to how this can affect our patients for what we do.

Case in point. A dermatologist wants to do a wide excisional biopsy of a tumorous mass. In his regular examination, his nurse notes a new onset of severe hypertension. Could the dermatologist manage this medical issue? They CAN, but they SHOULDN'T. Say this dermatologist does manage the hypertension and after the biopsy the patient gets hospitalized as they have a hypertensive crisis due to the stress of the surgery. They then die as a result of complications from this crisis (acute kidney failure for instances), or they go blind and are permanently disabled. The FIRST question will be why this dermatologist managed an acute medical issue and did not defer to another's expertise.

I don't care whether you call me a physician or not. All I care about is getting paid for the services I provide so I can provide for my family. As long as the Insurance companies call me a physician and pay my rates, you can call me a pooper scooper for all I care. That being said, there are differences between what Podiatrists get paid and what our Allopathic brothers and sisters get paid for performing the same service. This has not been proven as no one wants to own up to it, but that's a whole other thread.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

There is no such thing as a general physician anymore. Everyone specializes. You will realize this sooner or later. There is no such thing as a physician that can practice the entire scope of medicine.

As a family physician, I couldn't disagree more. Two months ago, I was the only in-house physician for OB/Gyn work. Last month, I was one of 2 doctors covering general medical admissions. This month, I'm the only doctor in house for newborns and peds admissions.

That being said, obviously we can't do absolutely everything - ORs are off-limits generally speaking. But our scope is very broad.

 

[347932]

As a family physician, I couldn't disagree more. Two months ago, I was the only in-house physician for OB/Gyn work. Last month, I was one of 2 doctors covering general medical admissions. This month, I'm the only doctor in house for newborns and peds admissions.

That being said, obviously we can't do absolutely everything - ORs are off-limits generally speaking. But our scope is very broad.

I've never heard of this tbh and I work with a medical school and multiple residency programs.

What system do you work in? And are you still a resident? If you're in private practice managing these things you are under huge liability.

 

[janV88]

As a family physician, I couldn't disagree more. Two months ago, I was the only in-house physician for OB/Gyn work. Last month, I was one of 2 doctors covering general medical admissions. This month, I'm the only doctor in house for newborns and peds admissions.

That being said, obviously we can't do absolutely everything - ORs are off-limits generally speaking. But our scope is very broad.

I guess in the "modern" sense of the word the closest thing to a "general physician" is a family physician but you just said exactly what I was saying..."we can't do absolutely everything".

If you read the med student's posts above me they believe that a physician has an unlimited license and can treat everything. Karizma even claimed that he is able to treat anything and everything once he graduates from medical school. Is this true? Can a psychiatrist give botox? or Can an ophthalmologist fix a shoulder dislocation?

 

[347932]

I guess in the "modern" sense of the word the closest thing to a "general physician" is a family physician but you just said exactly what I was saying..."we can't do absolutely everything".

If you read the med student's posts above me they believe that a physician has an unlimited license and can treat everything. Karizma even claimed that he is able to treat anything and everything once he graduates from medical school. Is this true? Can a psychiatrist give botox? or Can an ophthalmologist fix a shoulder dislocation?

The simple answer to your questions is actually yes, they can.

Botox is a bad example because its a fee for service, cosmetic treatment, which everyone and their mother is hoping on for cash.

Once again, the question is not "CAN they", the question is "SHOULD they".

 

[karizma098]

The simple answer to your questions is actually yes, they can.

Botox is a bad example because its a fee for service, cosmetic treatment, which everyone and their mother is hoping on for cash.

Once again, the question is not "CAN they", the question is "SHOULD they".

thank you. my point was all about training and skillset. there are plenty of family and IM docs that do botox, even urologists that do botox. as you said, should they? no. and i don't plan on being a physician that crosses out of my scope either.

 

[janV88]

The simple answer to your questions is actually yes, they can.

Botox is a bad example because its a fee for service, cosmetic treatment, which everyone and their mother is hoping on for cash.

Once again, the question is not "CAN they", the question is "SHOULD they".

I've talked to my brother a lot about this issue (he is an ER resident) and he says this sort of situation is not possible since a physician's unlimited scope of practice is determined by formal training. According to him no hospital will allow you to practice out of your scope and you will face reimbursement problems if you aren't BC or BE in that field. But I've also noticed that ER docs are very strict on, like you said, what people "should" be doing. I guess maybe it's the nature of their specialty since their job is to send their patient to the proper specialist.

But yeah your right, botox was a bad example.

 

[Marcus X]

http://doh.sd.gov/boards/pharmacy/PDF/PrescribingAuthority.pdf

http://www.oregon.gov/Pharmacy/Imports/prescribers50609.pdf

From the Oregon State Board of Pharmacy (copied from the link above):

"It is also important to note that a medical specialist may prescribe outside of his or her stated area of specialty. For example, a pediatrician may prescribe medication for pain due to an ankle injury in an adult. An obstetrician/gynecologist may prescribe medication for a male with hypertension. A cardiologist can prescribe antibiotics for a UTI. This is not a "scope of practice" issue since all these specialists are physicians first, with advanced specialty training. Their training and licensure as a physician authorizes them to examine patients, establish a medical diagnosis and prescribe appropriate medications and treatments. Their advanced specialty training does not limit their scope of practice to their area of specialty."

There are two examples. Of course it will vary by state.

 

[347932]

http://doh.sd.gov/boards/pharmacy/PDF/PrescribingAuthority.pdf

http://www.oregon.gov/Pharmacy/Imports/prescribers50609.pdf

"It is also important to note that a medical specialist may prescribe outside of his or her stated area of specialty. For example, a pediatrician may prescribe medication for pain due to an ankle injury in an adult. An obstetrician/gynecologist may prescribe medication for a male with hypertension. A cardiologist can prescribe antibiotics for a UTI. This is not a “scope of practice” issue since all these specialists are physicians first, with advanced specialty training. Their training and licensure as a physician authorizes them to examine patients, establish a medical diagnosis and prescribe appropriate medications and treatments. Their advanced specialty training does not limit their scope of practice to their area of specialty."

There are two examples. Of course it will vary by state.

I feel like I'm repeating myself. Yes a cardiologist CAN prescribe for a patient for a UTI, but if the patient dies of a drug reaction or the UTI gets worse and the patient has long term complications, his/her malpractice may refuse to cover the lawsuit as he/she was doing something outside of his expertise set. THIS is malpractice in the purest sense of the word. So they SHOULDN'T.

About a hospital letting you practice outside of your scope, that is clearly the case. But what about in your private office? Reimbursement has nothing to do with this particular topic as you don't get a higher reimbursement when prescribing meds (more or less).

 

[Marcus X]

I feel like I'm repeating myself. Yes a cardiologist CAN prescribe for a patient for a UTI, but if the patient dies of a drug reaction or the UTI gets worse and the patient has long term complications, his/her malpractice may refuse to cover the lawsuit as he/she was doing something outside of his expertise set. THIS is malpractice in the purest sense of the word. So they SHOULDN'T.

About a hospital letting you practice outside of your scope, that is clearly the case. But what about in your private office? Reimbursement has nothing to do with this particular topic as you don't get a higher reimbursement when prescribing meds (more or less).

The important part, which you've left off, is that a DPM CAN'T prescribe an antibiotic for a UTI. It is explicitly outside his or her scope, which is not the case for the cardiologist.

 

[347932]

The important part, which you've left off, is that a DPM CAN'T prescribe an antibiotic for a UTI. It is explicitly outside his or her scope, which is not the case for the cardiologist.

Really? Show me where it explicitly says this. Here's an example for you. I prescribe an antibiotic to a female patient for a paronychia and she tells me that she gets yeast infections every time she takes any oral antibiotic. Do I tell her to go to her primary doctor to get Diflucan? Nope. I write her a prescription for it and it has been filled EVERYTIME. This has actually been fought successful in court by a local colleague. So, what about that theory now? I'm sorry to sound condescending, but the real world is very different than the academic exercise in this thread.

 

[g squared 23]

I think this debate is a waste of time. MDs and others will always think that pods are second class doctors and will treat them as such. Pods will always have an inferiority complex and try to prove themselves but will always fall short. The answer? Make podiatry an MD degree and a specialty of medicine, not its own independent tiny profession with no recognition by the general public, no national scope, and absolutely no political pull.

 

[Marcus X]

Really? Show me where it explicitly says this. Here's an example for you. I prescribe an antibiotic to a female patient for a paronychia and she tells me that she gets yeast infections every time she takes any oral antibiotic. Do I tell her to go to her primary doctor to get Diflucan? Nope. I write her a prescription for it and it has been filled EVERYTIME. This has actually been fought successful in court by a local colleague. So, what about that theory now? I'm sorry to sound condescending, but the real world is very different than the academic exercise in this thread.

That's still related to your practice. If your patient says, "Oh, while I'm here, I also have a UTI. Can you give me something for it?" the answer is, "No." Is it going to be filled if you do? Probably. Is anyone going to care? Probably not. It's still technically outside of your legally-allowed scope. That's not the case for an MD/DO. Their legally-allowed scope is "medicine", all of it. Does anyone actually practice all of it? No. But they are legally allowed to prescribe any substance for any condition.

The attached image is from the South Dakota Board of Pharmacy. Of course, specific rules and restrictions will vary by state.

For further clarification, the quoted text regarding the cardiologist and the UTI is not my writing. It's from the Oregon Board of Pharmacy.

 

[347932]

You're an idiot. Podiatry residents prescribe antibiotics for post-op UTIs for their inpatients all the time.

Sir,

Firstly, to keep the convo civil, please refrain from outward assumptions of idiocy based on replies here.

Idiot or not, if you read what is being said, it is clear that in residency these rules DO NOT apply as a resident's license gives just about carte blanche, which is why I was able to do ruptured AAAs as a podiatry resident during my vascular surgery rotation.

 

[347932]

Marcus,

I've never seen a chart like the one you posted. Thank you for enlightening me. Interesting.

 

[Marcus X]

...which is why I was able to do ruptured AAAs as a podiatry resident during my vascular surgery rotation.

Sweet.

 

[LovinMed]

First DO doesn't = osteopath (in the modern sense of the word)


WTF???

 

[willdaniel76]

"Podiatrists aren't physicians bro. "


Why is it so hard to accept that there are different types of physicians? If you can cut into someone and prescribe medications then you are a physician. That would include, in my book, dentists, podiatrists and optometrists.

They are all just physcians that decided to take complete control in the decision of what area of medicine they want to practice. Specialists. While they may be legally bound to only practice within their specialty, MDs are only ethically bound and I bet that sooner or later that will change uniformly. There is nothing wrong with laws preventing a doctor from working outside his specialty until they prove confidence in another area; only good things can come from them.

Now on the other side of the coin I think most people can agree that while NDs, Auds, PharmDs and DCs are doctors(and rightfully so due to their education), they aren't physicians....yet.

 

[karizma098]

"Podiatrists aren't physicians bro. "


Why is it so hard to accept that there are different types of physicians? If you can cut into someone and prescribe medications then you are a physician. That would include, in my book, dentists, podiatrists and optometrists.

They are all just physcians that decided to take complete control in the decision of what area of medicine they want to practice. Specialists. While they may be legally bound to only practice within their specialty, MDs are only ethically bound and I bet that sooner or later that will change uniformly. There is nothing wrong with laws preventing a doctor from working outside his specialty until they prove confidence in another area; only good things can come from them.

Now on the other side of the coin I think most people can agree that while NDs, Auds, PharmDs and DCs are doctors(and rightfully so due to their education), they aren't physicians....yet.

i'm sorry, i can't agree, and i would say most people would not agree, that a dentist, podiatrist, or a optometrist is a physician, and they won't ever be.

regardless of your book, there are legal, classic , and social definitions of a 'physician', which requires knowledge and ability to diagnose and treat systemic disease, throughout the entire human body- not just the foot, mouth, or eye. though there are physicians who specialize in these fields, their training is not limited to them.

if dpm's, dds's, and optometrists were considered physicians, they would be licensed as such - i don't see that happening anytime soon. 'cutting' into someone and prescribing drugs is not a qualification for a physician, otherwise a good amount of nurses and PA's should be considered physicians too.

everyone can't be a medical doctor.


there isn't anything wrong with that - if these people wanted to be physicians, they would go to medical school. blurring the lines doesn't help anybody.

 

[karizma098]

First DO doesn't = osteopath (in the modern sense of the word)


WTF???

the word osteopath is a bit old school, osteopathic medicine is the term used today, ever since the DO degree became a medical license.

 

[willdaniel76]

A physician is someone that diagnoses and treats, through medical or surgical means, diseases and illnesses.

A dentist, podiatrist, MD, DO and OD do those things. They are all types of physicians.

While you are entitled to your opinion, I fail to see how you could disagree or why this is even a large topic of discussion.

 

[Marcus X]

A physician is someone that diagnoses and treats, through medical or surgical means, diseases and illnesses.

A dentist, podiatrist, MD, DO and OD do those things. They are all types of physicians.

While you are entitled to your opinion, I fail to see how you could disagree or why this is even a large topic of discussion.

Actually, historically speaking, the term "physician" denotes a specialist in internal medicine or one of its subspecialties.

 

[karizma098]

A physician is someone that diagnoses and treats, through medical or surgical means, diseases and illnesses.

A dentist, podiatrist, MD, DO and OD do those things. They are all types of physicians.

While you are entitled to your opinion, I fail to see how you could disagree or why this is even a large topic of discussion.

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Physicians :

an authorized practitioner of medicine, as one graduated from a college of medicine or osteopathy and licensed by the appropriate board."

- DPM , DDS, and OD are not part of this, or a legal definition of physician, and also, in my opinion.

i'm sorry, but considering dpm's OD, and dentists as physicians is really blurring some lines. DDS's gain their MD when they complete an oral surgery fellowship, but besides that i don't really see any other consideration. ( also, if DDS was already = physician, why award them an MD post oral surg. residency? )

 

[willdaniel76]

if dpm's, dds's, and optometrists were considered physicians, they would be licensed as such - i don't see that happening anytime soon. 'cutting' into someone and prescribing drugs is not a qualification for a physician, otherwise a good amount of nurses and PA's should be considered physicians too.

everyone can't be a medical doctor.


there isn't anything wrong with that - if these people wanted to be physicians, they would go to medical school. blurring the lines doesn't help anybody.

Good point, I should have said if one can independently do those things, not under supervision of one type or the other.

Nobody has said that podiatrists or dentists want to be medical doctors. They do deserve to be acknowledged truly for what they are though.

Also I agree about blurring the lines. That's exactly what people do when they attempt to own certain titles for themselves. In the end it only confuses patients. An optometrist isn't an ophthalmologist but both are types of physicians.

I can tell you as the others have that once you actually get out into the practicing world these discussions never come up. Nurses, doctors, medics, everyone defers to the expertise of the other. It's a large part of the very foundation of good patient care.

 

[janV88]

DDS's gain their MD when they complete an oral surgery fellowship, but besides that i don't really see any other consideration. ( also, if DDS was already = physician, why award them an MD post oral surg. residency? )

If I'm not mistaken, not all OMFS fellowships award DMD's and DDS's with an MD. The ones that do offer the MD require them to do M3 and M4 rotations before starting their OMFS training.

 

[Marcus X]

If I'm not mistaken, not all OMFS fellowships award DMD's and DDS's with an MD. The ones that do offer the MD require them to do M3 and M4 rotations before starting their OMFS training.

It seems that UCSF's program makes you complete years 2, 3, and 4 of medical school. And pay to do so.

 

[JaggerPlate]

"Podiatrists aren't physicians bro. "


Why is it so hard to accept that there are different types of physicians? If you can cut into someone and prescribe medications then you are a physician. That would include, in my book, dentists, podiatrists and optometrists.

They are all just physcians that decided to take complete control in the decision of what area of medicine they want to practice. Specialists. While they may be legally bound to only practice within their specialty, MDs are only ethically bound and I bet that sooner or later that will change uniformly. There is nothing wrong with laws preventing a doctor from working outside his specialty until they prove confidence in another area; only good things can come from them.

Now on the other side of the coin I think most people can agree that while NDs, Auds, PharmDs and DCs are doctors(and rightfully so due to their education), they aren't physicians....yet.

I disagree. The ability to 'cut and prescribe meds' doesn't make some entity a physician.

DO/MD = physician. Period.

 

[karizma098]

Good point, I should have said if one can independently do those things, not under supervision of one type or the other.

Nobody has said that podiatrists or dentists want to be medical doctors. They do deserve to be acknowledged truly for what they are though.

Also I agree about blurring the lines. That's exactly what people do when they attempt to own certain titles for themselves. In the end it only confuses patients. An optometrist isn't an ophthalmologist but both are types of physicians.

I can tell you as the others have that once you actually get out into the practicing world these discussions never come up. Nurses, doctors, medics, everyone defers to the expertise of the other. It's a large part of the very foundation of good patient care.

coming from a big family of MD's , DDS's, PharmD,s and more, and being on rotation in various chicago hospitals, having numerous friends at rosalind franklin for DPM, others at UIC dental, and yet others in optometry school - none have ever claimed to be a physician if they weren't MD/DO, it just doesn't make sense to me.. i just don't understand this mentality. an optometrist is not a physician , an ophtalmologist is - however they both have incredibly different roles in treatment of eye problems.

this is not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact, and the fact is that in the united states, anyone other than an MD or DO claiming to be a physician is partaking in false advertising, fair and simple.

 

[karizma098]

I disagree. The ability to 'cut and prescribe meds' doesn't make some entity a physician.

DO/MD = physician. Period.

thank you. i was starting to lose my mind. an optometrist as a physician, honestly? i almost choked on my corn flakes.

 

[Marcus X]

thank you. i was starting to lose my mind. an optometrist as a physician, honestly? i almost choked on my corn flakes.

Gross, Corn Flakes.

Or are you using them to... uh... control your passions?

 

[karizma098]

Gross, Corn Flakes.

Or are you using them to... uh... control your passions?

hahaha, though they are bland, they aren't too high in fat. trying to burn some of the weight i put on during boards time, eating mcdonalds and panera 3X a day..:-/

 

[willdaniel76]

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Physicians :

an authorized practitioner of medicine, as one graduated from a college of medicine or osteopathy and licensed by the appropriate board."

- DPM , DDS, and OD are not part of this, or a legal definition of physician, and also, in my opinion.

If you wanted to be technical certain states actually use the term physician in the laws that govern the practice of podiatry, optometry or dentistry so legally speaking they are considered physcians.

With the sense of knowledge and professionalism that comes with a title like physician you'd think that it would be something everyone in the medical field would be eager to promote when rightfully earned.

What's wrong with each individual doctor owning the title that comes with years of specialized training while being part of a large group of physicians? Physicians with the common goal of giving expert care to people that need it.

Ophthalmologist, pediatrician, urologist, podiatrist.... Each experts, each physicians.


That's just my take on it after years of working beside many different practitioners anyway. The beauty of our situation is that in the end we can all disagree and still be friendly.

 

[Marcus X]

hahaha, though they are bland, they aren't too high in fat. trying to burn some of the weight i put on during boards time, eating mcdonalds and panera 3X a day..:-/

I'd be impressed if they managed to be both bland AND high in fat.

Mmmm.... Panera...

 

[karizma098]

If you wanted to be technical certain states actually use the term physician in the laws that govern the practice of podiatry, optometry or dentistry so legally speaking they are considered physcians.

With the sense of knowledge and professionalism that comes with a title like physician you'd think that it would be something everyone in the medical field would be eager to promote when rightfully earned.

What's wrong with each individual doctor owning the title that comes with years of specialized training while being part of a large group of physicians? Physicians with the common goal of giving expert care to people that need it.

Ophthalmologist, pediatrician, urologist, podiatrist.... Each experts, each physicians.


That's just my take on it after years of working beside many different practitioners anyway. The beauty of our situation is that in the end we can all disagree and still be friendly.

no doubt. at the end of the day we're all on the same team.

 

[willdaniel76]

this is not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact, and the fact is that in the united states, anyone other than an MD or DO claiming to be a physician is partaking in false advertising, fair and simple.

And what of the states that specifically give the title physician to podiatrists? If you want to throw the common sense aspect out of the discussion you can't say they aren't physicians legally when the law says they are. That isn't a matter of opinion, its a matter of fact.

Someone said a few posts back that historically a physician was someone trained in internal medicine. Obviously the title changed and grew as more and more specialties began to pop up over the decades so why can't it continue to grow and be applied to others outside the MD\DO community?