Save The Merger

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Yeah, try to compare apples to oranges. Compare MSUCOM/OSUCOM to University of Michigan or Case Western. MD residencies compare allopathic schools to eachother as well.

You're a disingenuous person. You keep putting up fallacies to justify your points. For those reading, remember I said "any single scenario when a DO can have a stronger application than MD."

This is my last reply as it's useless to debate with ideologues. I'm interested in talking to people that have an open mind and not someone that just wants to troll on the internet.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[OCDEMS]

No bc a test score is not your entire medical education. It's one part of the puzzle. Also your 200 hours of OMM are not used in AOA Dermatology.

You conveniently ignore that DO clinical education is perfectly good at plenty of schools. Your arguments here are entirely flawed and your zeal in making them is equally interesting. Either way, you set yourself up so that you never have to argue the actual facts.

What's going to happen when NPs are banging at the door of dermatology? We both know it will happen eventually (and already is). You'll probably hope there were more DO dermatologist to properly meet the needs of the public. That's what is the worst part of this entire debacle: physicians bashing other physicians while there are larger problems to worry about.

 

[DermViser]

You conveniently ignore that DO clinical education is perfectly good at plenty of schools. Your arguments here are entirely flawed and your zeal in making them is equally interesting. Either way, you set yourself up so that you never have to argue the actual facts.

What's going to happen when NPs are banging at the door of dermatology? We both know it will happen eventually (and already is). You'll probably hope there were more DO dermatologist to properly meet the needs of the public. That's what is the worst part of this entire debacle: physicians bashing other physicians while there are larger problems to worry about.

NPs will be banging at the door of all specialties, something having more DO derms won't even solve or even mitigate.

 

[OCDEMS]

NPs will be banging at the door of all specialties, something having more DO derms won't even solve or even mitigate.

NPs are a result of our own profession's inability to saturate the market and meet patient demand. Even if their involvement is inevitable, the market's ability to absorb them is directly in relation to the availability of other qualified providers. Given the option of plenty of available physician dermatologists and an NP alternative, I think most people would take the MD/DO, unless of course there are not enough of them. This is to say nothing of the argument from NPs that they're equivalent and with less training. Meanwhile, you're arguing that one entire segment of fellow physicians are not good enough. Ha! Hopefully you're not making that argument when you start seeing reimbursements decrease due to cheaper competition.

Woulda coulda should've. That's the story of physician infighting. Some would rather point fingers and stomp around in an effort to show their superiority against that of their own colleagues.

 

[DermViser]

NPs are a result of our own profession's inability to saturate the market and meet patient demand. Even if their involvement is inevitable, the market's ability to absorb them is directly in relation to the availability of other qualified providers. Given the option of plenty of available physician dermatologists and an NP alternative, I think most people would take the MD/DO, unless of course there are not enough of them. This is to say nothing of the argument from NPs that they're equivalent and with less training. Meanwhile, you're arguing that one entire segment of fellow physicians are not good enough. Ha! Hopefully you're not making that argument when you start seeing reimbursements decrease due to cheaper competition.

Woulda coulda should've. That's the story of physician infighting. Some would rather point fingers and stomp around in an effort to show their superiority against that of their own colleagues.

I have no qualms with NPs seeing derm patients. We've had enough of their screwups see us due to being misdiagnosed by an NP.

 

[Petypet]

NPs are a result of our own profession's inability to saturate the market and meet patient demand. Even if their involvement is inevitable, the market's ability to absorb them is directly in relation to the availability of other qualified providers. Given the option of plenty of available physician dermatologists and an NP alternative, I think most people would take the MD/DO, unless of course there are not enough of them. This is to say nothing of the argument from NPs that they're equivalent and with less training. Meanwhile, you're arguing that one entire segment of fellow physicians are not good enough. Ha! Hopefully you're not making that argument when you start seeing reimbursements decrease due to cheaper competition.

Woulda coulda should've. That's the story of physician infighting. Some would rather point fingers and stomp around in an effort to show their superiority against that of their own colleagues.

Well said. At the end of the day hopefully our colleagues appreciate our skills if and when they ever need our services.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

FEDERAL MONEY. Why is that so hard to understand?

I think what you are saying is that because GME comes from the government, that makes PDs accountable for being fair to all applicants.

Thats not reality though.
PDs are selecting from an enormous pool of applicants. They can and do trim down their applicant pool based on a lot factors. One of those factors is your medical school.

If they were nixing you because of your religious beliefs, we would have an argument. Your choice to attend a DO school is not a federally protected aspect of your application.
If it wasn't your choice to attend a DO school, and you couldnt get into an MD school (which is the case for a significant chunk of DO students), then PDs are also justified in barring you for not being as strong of an applicant.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

I think what you are saying is that because GME comes from the government, that makes PDs accountable for being fair to all applicants.

Thats not reality though.
PDs are selecting from an enormous pool of applicants. They can and do trim down their applicant pool based on a lot factors. One of those factors is your medical school.

If they were nixing you because of your religious beliefs, we would have an argument. Your choice to attend a DO school is not a federally protected aspect of your application.
If it wasn't your choice to attend a DO school, and you couldnt get into an MD school (which is the case for a significant chunk of DO students), then PDs are also justified in barring you for not being as strong of an applicant.

Entirely wrong. The moment that DOs and MDs share the residencies, the MDs have given up their privilege of being sole owners. They aren't MD only. They are BOTH MD and DO, so yes, the federal money means they are accountable and both degrees become truly equal. This is then not about "school choice." I don't care about what the "reality" is now. I'm talking about what should be once the merger happens. Do you understand my argument? Because I feel I'm repeating myself here.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Entirely wrong. The moment that DOs and MDs share the residencies, the MDs have given up their privilege of being sole owners. They aren't MD only. They are BOTH MD and DO, so yes, the federal money means they are accountable and both degrees become truly equal. This is then not about "school choice." I don't care about what the "reality" is now. I'm talking about what should be once the merger happens. Do you understand my argument? Because I feel I'm repeating myself here.

It is in fact 100% about school choice.

A graduate from Hopkins is not equal to a graduate of Drexel and they have been sharing residency opportunities for quite a while now.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

It is in fact 100% about school choice.

A graduate from Hopkins is not equal to a graduate of Drexel and they have been sharing residency opportunities for quite a while now.

I'm starting to get this vibe that MDs are getting scared of us DOs. What's the problem? You don't think you can compete with us?

 

[ChrisGriffen]

I'm starting to get this vibe that MDs are getting scared of us DOs. What's the problem? You don't think you can compete with us?

....Yea I am not an MD, I just dont live in a fantasy land.

 

[DermViser]

I'm starting to get this vibe that MDs are getting scared of us DOs. What's the problem? You don't think you can compete with us?

Yeah, that must be it. The Hopkins vs. Drexel scenario that ChrisGriffen gave is the perfect example. Even in the MD world those 2 graduates will not be treated the same and graduates from both those schools have same access.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

....Yea I am not an MD, I just dont live in a fantasy land.

I've seen Ohio State graduates match at Harvard. Are they exactly equivalent to HMS/Hopkins applicants? Clearly not. You don't live in reality. You live in pessimism, and it's people like you that just tacitly accept the system that allow it to perpetuate. If DOs before us didn't believe, we wouldn't have equal rights. It seems fantasy land can pay off.

 

[Petypet]

I've seen Ohio State graduates match at Harvard. Are they exactly equivalent to HMS/Hopkins applicants? Clearly not. You don't live in reality. You live in pessimism, and it's people like you that just tacitly accept the system that allow it to perpetuate. If DOs before us didn't believe, we wouldn't have equal rights. It seems fantasy land can pay off.

Ha we may have the same friends. My OSU buddy retook mcat 3x, 26, 35, 34 and went to Harvard for fellowship/residency. I got 37 and had to retake mcat because my score expired and got a 31. We have the same GPA, but somehow he is magically a better "applicant". I love the game we play.

 

[Member 331305]

I'm starting to get this vibe that MDs are getting scared of us DOs. What's the problem? You don't think you can compete with us?

Programs are allowed to discriminate between applicants on the basis of their pedigree. If programs perceive DO schools as less prestigious than MD schools, then it is fair to favor MD applicants over DO applicants. Maybe you should direct your concerns towards your individual medical school or the accrediting body for DO schools.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Nevermind. I look forward to the perfectly fair world we'll have after the merger.

 

[NurWollen]

Nevermind. I look forward to the perfectly fair world we'll have after the merger.

No one is saying the world is going to be perfectly fair after the merger. No one. That doesn't mean it's not a huge step in the right direction.

 

[Gatorman177]

Been following this thread since the beginning. The problem is several people on here keep discussing each extreme end of the spectrum of possibilities. When in reality the outcome is actually going to be somewhere in the middle of these extremes. And in my opinion it will be on the better side.

 

[Dr. Zombie]

No one is saying the world is going to be perfectly fair after the merger. No one. That doesn't mean it's not a huge step in the right direction.

Unfortunately, you will see here on SDN, many are short-sighted people who overspeculate and usually towards the negative side.

In the bigger picture of things, the merger is a step in the right direction. AOA programs need to be revamped and there is nothing negative about that.

 

[NurWollen]

Been following this thread since the beginning. The problem is several people on here keep discussing each extreme end of the spectrum of possibilities. When in reality the outcome is actually going to be somewhere in the middle of these extremes. And in my opinion it will be on the better side.

qft.

 

[OCDEMS]

I'm starting to get this vibe that MDs are getting scared of us DOs. What's the problem? You don't think you can compete with us?

No, they're not scared of DOs. I do think some parts of the larger medical community are upset about the fact that 28% of the future ACGME board will be inhabited with representatives of the AOA/AACOM. This entire discrimination thing is sort of a nonissue, because it'll slowly be worked out once the merger is completed. Having 1/4 of all the votes is a tremendous amount of power for a small minority of physicians. Eventually, someone will want a pet project/policy approved and the DOs, who are linked by a common heritage, degree, and shared experience, will cash in their ticket. What price do you think the DOs on that board will exact on anyone who screws with their students/residents?

But none of that will happen. Why? Because the vast majority of ACGME PDs will be interested in finding the best applicants, regardless of where they came from. Will that always be a DO? Of course not. Remember, we're a minority. You're never going to see a DO in every residency class. That's unrealistic, but you will see programs slowly open their doors to the possibility. How do we know this? Because so many programs already take DOs. Sure, there will be doors closed for years to come, maybe even forever, BUT eventually the number of places with the nuts to flat out advertise they don't rank DOs will dwindle. They'll just have to get by softly discriminating based on perceived prestige or whatever.

Osteopathic medicine is 65,000 people who are almost all represented by a cohesive, albeit sometimes contentious, lobbying body. That number grows every year. The AOA has been doing the above for over 100 years. They're like your eccentric uncle who sometimes talks about the recent trekkie convention. Lastly, I would encourage every DO student to remember one thing: you don't want to match somewhere that doesn't appreciate you. Don't worry about it. Any program that turns away an excellent applicant, both on paper and after observation, just because they went to a school they don't like is not a program you want to be a part of. When you're in school, do your best, take your boards seriously, and get out there and impress on rotations.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Overspeculation is the best way to describe this entire thread. I honestly dont think the merger is going to change anything at all. Thats not me being negative, its just me being truthful.

Overspeculation goes like this:
Step 1) the acgme absorbs/merges with the aoa

Step 2) ?

Step 3) ?

Step 4) ?

Step 5) the DO bias doesnt exist anymore

 

[Petypet]

Maybe its because I live in Ohio where DO's have probably been in 95% of all the residency programs in the state, but the bias you speak of is so blown out of proportion. This bias exists mostly because the DOs perpetuate it. Have we broken into all the residency programs in the country, by all means no, but are we closer than we were 10 years ago, yes.

What has happened in your career that you observe so much hate?

 

[ChrisGriffen]

I dont think I see the DO bias to be anymore prevalent than it is. Calling the merger "a step in the right direction" implies that there is a significant bias out there.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

I also am in a very DO friendly area, but I am assuming you are an M1/M2 if you dont agree that there is a bais vs DOs. You will see it in clinical rotations

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

No, they're not scared of DOs. I do think some parts of the larger medical community are upset about the fact that 28% of the future ACGME board will be inhabited with representatives of the AOA/AACOM. This entire discrimination thing is sort of a nonissue, because it'll slowly be worked out once the merger is completed. Having 1/4 of all the votes is a tremendous amount of power for a small minority of physicians. Eventually, someone will want a pet project/policy approved and the DOs, who are linked by a common heritage, degree, and shared experience, will cash in their ticket. What price do you think the DOs on that board will exact on anyone who screws with their students/residents?

But none of that will happen. Why? Because the vast majority of ACGME PDs will be interested in finding the best applicants, regardless of where they came from. Will that always be a DO? Of course not. Remember, we're a minority. You're never going to see a DO in every residency class. That's unrealistic, but you will see programs slowly open their doors to the possibility. How do we know this? Because so many programs already take DOs. Sure, there will be doors closed for years to come, maybe even forever, BUT eventually the number of places with the nuts to flat out advertise they don't rank DOs will dwindle. They'll just have to get by softly discriminating based on perceived prestige or whatever.

Osteopathic medicine is 65,000 people who are almost all represented by a cohesive, albeit sometimes contentious, lobbying body. That number grows every year. The AOA has been doing the above for over 100 years. They're like your eccentric uncle who sometimes talks about the recent trekkie convention. Lastly, I would encourage every DO student to remember one thing: you don't want to match somewhere that doesn't appreciate you. Don't worry about it. Any program that turns away an excellent applicant, both on paper and after observation, just because they went to a school they don't like is not a program you want to be a part of. When you're in school, do your best, take your boards seriously, and get out there and impress on rotations.

I strongly agree with this sentiment. I'm not saying we should knock down doors and force Harvard at gunpoint to take any DO we want. What I'm saying is that currently, for example, 70% of Neurosurgery programs won't even look at a DO application, so I think it would be fair if they at least gave us consideration instead of pressing a button to ban us. Maybe someone will be surprised and find a kid from MSUCOM or Rowan with a 270 USMLE who did away rotations at Columbia and has big publications and he or she is given a shot. I don't think I'm asking for too much by asking to be considered. I think it's only fair that if they want us to share our dermatology, otolaryngology and other residencies that they at least allow us the same courtesy. What's the point of just accepting someone into an HMS residency only because they went to Hopkins? I thought it was a meritocracy and we could be above pettiness and the best man/woman wins.

 

[OCDEMS]

Maybe its because I live in Ohio where DO's have probably been in 95% of all the residency programs in the state, but the bias you speak of is so blown out of proportion. This bias exists mostly because the DOs perpetuate it. Have we broken into all the residency programs in the country, by all means no, but are we closer than we were 10 years ago, yes.

What has happened in your career that you observe so much hate?

Not sure if you're referring to me, but if so, I haven't. I had a previous career in healthcare and have never actually seen DO discrimination. In fact, I saw nothing but a collegial atmosphere between the DOs and MDs I worked with. When I write here I'm mostly responding to the hyperbole spewed on SDN by others, although a casual browsing of the forums here will reveal that there is evidence of "discrimination," which is why I've forced myself to acknowledge the other side of the debate and to acknowledge it exists. Most of what I wrote above is a rhetorical device to demonstrate that the sky isn't falling and that DOs are well represented. On the flip side, I get somewhat irritated by DO students who are self-deprecating and immediately jump on the "AOA sucks and I wish I wasn't a DO" bandwagon.

I actually share most of the sentiments of Chris and many other posters here. Even as I argue with people here, I'm always aware that this is an internet forum and that diverse and opposing viewpoints are an important part of SDN's function. I can argue with @DermViser and realize it's not the end of the world if we disagree. I think the merger will be mostly positive, especially for DO students. I'm not a fan of some of the BS that occurs within the DO vs. MD debates here. I also believe there are valid arguments from the other side and I'm willing to represent them here too.

 

[Dr. Zombie]

I also am in a very DO friendly area, but I am assuming you are an M1/M2 if you dont agree that there is a bais vs DOs. You will see it in clinical rotations

Can you explain the bias that YOU have seen in clinical rotations?

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Can you explain the bias that YOU have seen in clinical rotations?

No....but if you want to make the claim that the merger is "a step in the right direction", then you have to agree that a bias exists.

 

[Dr. Zombie]

No....but if you want to make the claim that the merger is "a step in the right direction", then you have to agree that a bias exists.

I thought so. I don't see how anyone can argue that a bias doesn't exist. There's evidence.

The merger is a step in the right direction because it will revamp AOA programs. That's all I said.

 

[TopTomato]

Is there any real chance the merger is called off? Everyone on SDN keeps arguing about speculation on what could happen. I just want somebody to give me facts about the merger already!

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Is there any real chance the merger is called off? Everyone on SDN keeps arguing about speculation on what could happen. I just want somebody to give me facts about the merger already!

As far as I know the merger is 100% going to happen.

 

[NurWollen]

Is there any real chance the merger is called off? Everyone on SDN keeps arguing about speculation on what could happen. I just want somebody to give me facts about the merger already!

That's kind of why I started this thread lol. I think there aren't many more details to be had at this point and that's why there's been such a lively discussion. We want to know more but really can't at this point and so we just resort to speculation and debate.

 

[Xenoblade]

I've seen Ohio State graduates match at Harvard. Are they exactly equivalent to HMS/Hopkins applicants? Clearly not. You don't live in reality. You live in pessimism, and it's people like you that just tacitly accept the system that allow it to perpetuate. If DOs before us didn't believe, we wouldn't have equal rights. It seems fantasy land can pay off.

I read every post here. Love the drama. lol.

@AlbinoHawkDO

If memory serves me correctly, you haven't even started medical school yet.

@DermViser has experience with talking to PD's. Do you? If you haven't, then you are arguing from a place of ignorance. Dermviser at least talked to one pd.

The allo PD's that I have talked to are not changing their minds about what they have done in the past. Uncompetitive specialties will still take do's. Competitive ones will still throw them in the trash.

I oppose this merger because it screws over a small minority of do's really badly. You will be competing against MD marauders in competitive specialties, like ortho.

 

[DermViser]

You're a disingenuous person. You keep putting up fallacies to justify your points. For those reading, remember I said "any single scenario when a DO can have a stronger application than MD."

This is my last reply as it's useless to debate with ideologues. I'm interested in talking to people that have an open mind and not someone that just wants to troll on the internet.

You're the one trolling, considering you have not even set foot in medical school, and believe that you have all the answers. That's why you're now using extremes as your examples ("Maybe someone will be surprised and find a kid from MSUCOM or Rowan with a 270 USMLE who did away rotations at Columbia and has big publications and he or she is given a shot."), hence your lack of reality-based thinking and how you believe things SHOULD be after the merger, and screaming discrimination.

As far as "I thought it was a meritocracy and we could be above pettiness and the best man/woman wins," you truly need to get out of your fantasy world.

 

[DermViser]

I read every post here. Love the drama. lol.

@AlbinoHawkDO

If memory serves me correctly, you haven't even started medical school yet.

@DermViser has experience with talking to PD's. Do you? If you haven't, then you are arguing from a place of ignorance. Dermviser at least talked to one pd.

The allo PD's that I have talked to are not changing their minds about what they have done in the past. Uncompetitive specialties will still take do's. Competitive ones will still throw them in the trash.

I oppose this merger because it screws over a small minority of do's really badly. You will be competing against MD marauders in competitive specialties, like ortho.

You're correct. He has not started med school yet.

 

[Beth_W737]

Actually to add fuel to the fire we did have one grad match UCSD in EM I believe, at Rowan this year, which is a first, I don't believe they were historically DO friendly. No neurosurg this year but not sure anyone tried for it.

 

[DermViser]

Actually to add fuel to the fire we did have one grad match UCSD in EM I believe, at Rowan this year, which is a first, I don't believe they were historically DO friendly. No neurosurg this year but not sure anyone tried for it.

If UCSD is considered high tier, even in EM, then it proves my point.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

I read every post here. Love the drama. lol.

@AlbinoHawkDO

If memory serves me correctly, you haven't even started medical school yet.

@DermViser has experience with talking to PD's. Do you? If you haven't, then you are arguing from a place of ignorance. Dermviser at least talked to one pd.

The allo PD's that I have talked to are not changing their minds about what they have done in the past. Uncompetitive specialties will still take do's. Competitive ones will still throw them in the trash.

I oppose this merger because it screws over a small minority of do's really badly. You will be competing against MD marauders in competitive specialties, like ortho.

No different than Gevitz on your side who has never step foot into a medical school class. Maybe don't assume I have never talked to a PD? I'm a non-trad. I have had a life and I make informed decisions. I think it's rather sad when you try to make this about rank in a hierarchy. How about next time your argument is based on something substantial?

 

[ChrisGriffen]

No different than Gevitz on your side who has never step foot into a medical school class. Maybe don't assume I have never talked to a PD? I'm a non-trad. I have had a life and I make informed decisions. I think it's rather sad when you try to make this about rank in a hierarchy. How about next time your argument is based on something substantial?

You know less than nothing about medical education.
What makes it worse is the fact that you think you know what you are talking about

 

[Telekinesis]

If you think a merger is gonna miraculously change allo PD thinking regarding DOs I have a bridge to sell you in Idaho

 

[SurgeDO]

if you study hard, rank in the top of your class, and rock the boards, you will stop giving a **** about all this. the amount of programs discriminating against 260+ publication machines are few and far between. i would argue that places that do "discriminate" have questionable motives and should be carefully considered anyway.

i have said this many times before, but it really, really is not my problem (nor should it be yours) if some 70 year old loser wants to think less of me because of my degree. worry about being competent and let the bull **** of medicine flow right on by.

 

[Xenoblade]

No different than Gevitz on your side who has never step foot into a medical school class. Maybe don't assume I have never talked to a PD? I'm a non-trad. I have had a life and I make informed decisions. I think it's rather sad when you try to make this about rank in a hierarchy. How about next time your argument is based on something substantial?

Do you? If you haven't, then you are arguing from a place of ignorance.

Notice that this was a question, not an accusation.

 

[Apprands31]

if you study hard, rank in the top of your class, and rock the boards, you will stop giving a **** about all this. the amount of programs discriminating against 260+ publication machines are few and far between. i would argue that places that do "discriminate" have questionable motives and should be carefully considered anyway.

i have said this many times before, but it really, really is not my problem (nor should it be yours) if some 70 year old loser wants to think less of me because of my degree. worry about being competent and let the bull **** of medicine flow right on by.

Do you think the merger will make it easier to get into MGH, Hopkins and Stanford?

 

[NurWollen]

if you study hard, rank in the top of your class, and rock the boards, you will stop giving a **** about all this. the amount of programs discriminating against 260+ publication machines are few and far between. i would argue that places that do "discriminate" have questionable motives and should be carefully considered anyway.

i have said this many times before, but it really, really is not my problem (nor should it be yours) if some 70 year old loser wants to think less of me because of my degree. worry about being competent and let the bull **** of medicine flow right on by.

So so true.

 

[Kaputt]

I strongly agree with this sentiment. I'm not saying we should knock down doors and force Harvard at gunpoint to take any DO we want. What I'm saying is that currently, for example, 70% of Neurosurgery programs won't even look at a DO application, so I think it would be fair if they at least gave us consideration instead of pressing a button to ban us. Maybe someone will be surprised and find a kid from MSUCOM or Rowan with a 270 USMLE who did away rotations at Columbia and has big publications and he or she is given a shot. I don't think I'm asking for too much by asking to be considered. I think it's only fair that if they want us to share our dermatology, otolaryngology and other residencies that they at least allow us the same courtesy. What's the point of just accepting someone into an HMS residency only because they went to Hopkins? I thought it was a meritocracy and we could be above pettiness and the best man/woman wins.

The process is still largely a meritocracy, but where you went to school is also part of the merit equation. Where you went to med school is essentially a summation of how academically successful you were before med school, and add in the quality training you'd get at an institution like HMS, Hopkins, etc. and you have lots of feathers in your cap. Also, students that go to these power-houses network with the all-stars in their fields, and get letters of recommendation and stamps of approval from the big names in the field.

This isn't the whole puzzle though. Even if we ignore DOs for a second, there are tons and tons of reasons why otherwise "qualified" applicants don't make the cut at competitive residency programs. Some competitive places essentially only interview people from top 25 med schools. Some programs hardly interview applicants outside of their region. Some programs will hardly interview anybody that's not in Alpha Omega Alpha. Is that discrimination? Programs are free to pick their interview pool how they please...if MGH internal medicine can fill their spots with excellent MDs from institutions they've had successful residents from for decades, who's to stop them? Virtually every residency program out there knows the makeup of their resident class before the applications even roll in. Do you want them to have a DO-quota? Then why not a "low-tier MD" quota too?

On the flipside, what's to stop these historically DO programs from taking only DOs and not considering MDs? That's probably what's going to happen in the short-term. Which basically just means that all of this is good for DOs because now they don't have to withdraw from the osteopathic match to gamble on the allopathic match, and the MD applicants just keep on doing what they're doing.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

The process is still largely a meritocracy, but where you went to school is also part of the merit equation. Where you went to med school is essentially a summation of how academically successful you were before med school, and add in the quality training you'd get at an institution like HMS, Hopkins, etc. and you have lots of feathers in your cap. Also, students that go to these power-houses network with the all-stars in their fields, and get letters of recommendation and stamps of approval from the big names in the field.

This isn't the whole puzzle though. Even if we ignore DOs for a second, there are tons and tons of reasons why otherwise "qualified" applicants don't make the cut at competitive residency programs. Some competitive places essentially only interview people from top 25 med schools. Some programs hardly interview applicants outside of their region. Some programs will hardly interview anybody that's not in Alpha Omega Alpha. Is that discrimination? Programs are free to pick their interview pool how they please...if MGH internal medicine can fill their spots with excellent MDs from institutions they've had successful residents from for decades, who's to stop them? Virtually every residency program out there knows the makeup of their resident class before the applications even roll in. Do you want them to have a DO-quota? Then why not a "low-tier MD" quota too?

On the flipside, what's to stop these historically DO programs from taking only DOs and not considering MDs? That's probably what's going to happen in the short-term. Which basically just means that all of this is good for DOs because now they don't have to withdraw from the osteopathic match to gamble on the allopathic match, and the MD applicants just keep on doing what they're doing.

I'm not asking for any quotas. I'm only asking for the opportunity to present your case and for discrimination not to be only based on degree. There's no reason to demand a USMLE grade of 250 from DOs while only 220 from MDs. Precious clinical rotations are not going to make up for a 30 point gap. I also don't want discrimination from the DO side toward MD either. We all have bigger problems facing us: NPs.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Do you? If you haven't, then you are arguing from a place of ignorance.

Notice that this was a question, not an accusation.

Yes, I have had the opportunity to work in top 5 research university and have had the opportunity to talk to MDs in anesthesia and neurology mainly.

 

[Kaputt]

I'm not asking for any quotas. I'm only asking for the opportunity to present your case and for discrimination not to be only based on degree. There's no reason to demand a USMLE grade of 250 from DOs while only 220 from MDs. Precious clinical rotations are not going to make up for a 30 point gap. I also don't want discrimination from the DO side toward MD either. We all have bigger problems facing us: NPs.

Why just because of your degree? I have friends whose apps were thrown in the trash at some programs simply because they weren't Alpha Omega Alpha.

The school you go to is a reflection of your own level of achievement, like it or not. It's not something you didn't choose, like your gender or ethnicity. You knew what you were getting into (hopefully...if not, too bad). I knew that my MD degree would not be viewed as equivalent to a Hopkins grad's. Just the way it is.

You are offering no solutions to this problem, and are basically just complaining. Programs should maintain the right to pick and choose applicants based on their pedigree. If Princeton had a prestigious DO school that towered above most MD institutions, I wouldn't have a problem with them getting preference over my school. There is a pecking order, and it just so happens that virtually all DO schools sit below the lowest-tier US MD schools. There is no industry or human institution that is free of this. Law and business are far worse...medicine is fairly tame. You're only locked out of a small subset of programs, and if you wanted a specific specialty enough you could break into it.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Why just because of your degree? I have friends whose apps were thrown in the trash at some programs simply because they weren't Alpha Omega Alpha.

The school you go to is a reflection of your own level of achievement, like it or not. It's not something you didn't choose, like your gender or ethnicity. You knew what you were getting into (hopefully...if not, too bad). I knew that my MD degree would not be viewed as equivalent to a Hopkins grad's. Just the way it is.

You are offering no solutions to this problem, and are basically just complaining. Programs should maintain the right to pick and choose applicants based on their pedigree. If Princeton had a prestigious DO school that towered above most MD institutions, I wouldn't have a problem with them getting preference over my school. There is a pecking order, and it just so happens that virtually all DO schools sit below the lowest-tier US MD schools. There is no industry or human institution that is free of this. Law and business are far worse...medicine is fairly tame. You're only locked out of a small subset of programs, and if you wanted a specific specialty enough you could break into it.

Because now both MD and DO will own the residencies. Being AOA or Sigma Sigma Phi is about your grades. A degree at worst says you didn't do as well in undergrad or weren't lucky enough to live in a place like New Mexico where the bottom 10% MCAT is like a 22.

I get that you don't have a problem being discriminated. I do and am not alone in that. I also don't care what business or law does, and no matter what they do, it doesn't follow that medicine should too. Also please implying things I haven't said.