Shedding light on erroneous information in the MD/DO thread

[Parietal Lobe]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Forgive me, but just before the thread closure, Law2Doc posted inaccurate information that, IMO, should be corrected.

At the start of the DO movement, they worked at totally separate hospitals, and were not able to prescribe drugs. So MDs didn't see them as physicians at all. And this wasn't that long ago -- most of the older physicians in practice today remember this time, and a lot have formulated their opinions of DOs during this era. In more recent times, they have become equally licensed, and now practice side by side with MDs at the same hospitals. Their education is now largely identical. Many do their rotations at allopathic facilities, and more and more DOs are taking the USMLE and doing allopathic residencies. But prevalence of DOs is still certainly regional -- some parts of the country don't have many, and a lot of older doctors still see them as constituting a different animal than an MD, because honestly back in 1980, they were.

This is wrong. The majority of states gave DOs unlimited practice rights -- equivalent to MDs -- before the end of WW II. The last state to do so was Mississippi and that was in 1973. Therefore, these doctors you're speaking of, the majority have retired. The few still in practice will be retiring very soon, I imagine, since they must be nearing 70 years old. Not sure where the reference to 1980 came from, but legally, DOs were recognized as equivalent to MDs with full unlimited practice rights well before 1980.

 

[fahimaz7]

I thought DO's made their first big gain in 1966 when the military granted them the right to practice as a physician? Either way, why live in the past when the present is here?

Can DO's practice any field of medicine? Sure.. Is there still discrimination around the country? Sure.

 

[Parietal Lobe]

http://history.osteopathic.org/laws.shtml

No one's living in the past. The post was made and it was inaccurate and needed to be corrected.

 

[OveractiveBrain]

Concrete, perfectionist, and obsessive compulsive. You, good sir, are the true med student!

Thanks for the correction of this critical erroneous fact!

 

[Parietal Lobe]

If you don't like it, ignore the thread. It's not obsessive compulsive to point out inaccurate information about a degree that a lot of people here on SDN are getting.

 

[fahimaz7]

If you don't like it, ignore the thread. It's not obsessive compulsive to point out inaccurate information about a degree that a lot of people here on SDN are getting.

So by 1971 DO's could practice in any state? What point are you trying to make here? Why do people always feel the need to defend the DO profession? DO's are fine and dandy, with clinical and basic science curriculum that are vey similar to MD schools, if you compare the two institutions in the 21st century. You guys are getting a fine education these days, so why do you care what some random person on SDN has to say about your degree program?

PS. DO's were not given full recognition until the US military decided to let them practice medicine in the armed forces. Prior to this, DO's were very limited in their scope (state specific obviously) and their modes of reimbursement. Also, I'm not sure you can compare a DO's training in 1950 to their current curriculum today, if you want to do the whole DO=MD argument, since they were quite different back then.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

Dude, why are you trying to be a jackass? With all the DO bashing that goes on here, I don't blame any DO students for wanting to set the record straight.

L2D's post and point was about the older generation of docs being discriminatory toward DOs since DOs didn't have practice rights as recently as the 1980s. That's incorrect. Why shouldn't someone say so?

P.S. I'm an MD student, but I would never hold it against DO students for wanting their profession to be accurately portrayed. Perhaps you think it shouldn't matter, but obviously, it does for some. So be it. Move on with your life.

 

[JaggerPlate]

So by 1971 DO's could practice in any state? What point are you trying to make here? Why do people always feel the need to defend the DO profession? DO's are fine and dandy, with clinical and basic science curriculum that are vey similar to MD schools, if you compare the two institutions in the 21st century. You guys are getting a fine education these days, so why do you care what some random person on SDN has to say about your degree program?

PS. DO's were not given full recognition until the US military decided to let them practice medicine in the armed forces. Prior to this, DO's were very limited in their scope (state specific obviously) and their modes of reimbursement. Also, I'm not sure you can compare a DO's training in 1950 to their current curriculum today, if you want to do the whole DO=MD argument, since they were quite different back then.

Yeah, I'm not really sure the second thread was necessary. I didn't think Law2Doc's post sounded like some crazed, pre-medical rant or anything. I personally only feel the need to 'clarify' certain DO things when people make REALLY misinformed claims (see: pre-med forums). However, I definitely understand wanting to clear up some chronology issues (which could have been easily noted if the thread wasn't closed).

However, I did want to point out that DOs were recognized in all branches of the armed services in 1966 (though there were also significant breakthroughs in 1941 and the 1950s):

http://history.osteopathic.org/recmilitary.shtml

So still before the 1971/1973 err whatever number being thrown around.

Again though ... like you said - it's obvious there was a point in time (albeit long ago) where DOs simply practiced in a different model, weren't on par with the DO/MD education of today (or likely the MD education of that time), etc, and it's really not that big of a deal to the DOs who graduate from COMs in the 21st century (though the history is interesting; a lot of very impressive leaps and bounds were made; and I'm proud of the work put forth by a lot of DOs that led to the rights and privileges of today).

 

[MedStudentWanna]

PS. DO's were not given full recognition until the US military decided to let them practice medicine in the armed forces. Prior to this, DO's were very limited in their scope (state specific obviously) and their modes of reimbursement.

Many, if not most, states gave DOs unlimited scope of practice prior to 1966.

 

[JaggerPlate]

I don't blame any DO students for wanting to set the record straight.

L2D's post and point was about the older generation of docs being discriminatory toward DOs since DOs didn't have practice rights as recently as the 1980s. That's incorrect. Why shouldn't someone say so?

P.S. I'm an MD student, but I would never hold it against DO students for wanting their profession to be accurately portrayed. Perhaps you think it shouldn't matter, but obviously, it does for some. So be it. Move on with your life.

Nicely said.

 

[thesauce]

Dude, why are you trying to be a jackass? With all the DO bashing that goes on here, I don't blame any DO students for wanting to set the record straight.

L2D's post and point was about the older generation of docs being discriminatory toward DOs since DOs didn't have practice rights as recently as the 1980s. That's incorrect. Why shouldn't someone say so?

P.S. I'm an MD student, but I would never hold it against DO students for wanting their profession to be accurately portrayed. Perhaps you think it shouldn't matter, but obviously, it does for some. So be it. Move on with your life.

I doubt that was his intention. The point is that you'd be hard pressed to find a thread on here without some level of false information and you have to let it roll off your back. You can't keep starting new threads every time this happens.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

I doubt that was his intention. The point is that you'd be hard pressed to find a thread on here without some level of false information and you have to let it roll off your back. You can't keep starting new threads every time this happens.

Why not? If the other thread hadn't been closed, a new thread wouldn't have been started. Frankly, I'd rather read threads correcting misinformation than a thread that asks us if it's sad that a poster spent a Saturday night in Anatomy lab. If you don't, then skip this thread. Don't police it.

 

[ruiner]

Why not? If the other thread hadn't been closed, a new thread wouldn't have been started. Frankly, I'd rather read threads correcting misinformation than a thread that asks us if it's sad that a poster spent a Saturday night in Anatomy lab. If you don't, then skip this thread. Don't police it.

I would have avoided this had you titled it "Shedding light on erroneous date in the MD/DO thread." Instead you misrepresented it as being important information that might have been of interest to me and, in doing so, perpetuated a stereotype.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

I would have avoided this had you titled it "Shedding light on erroneous date in the MD/DO thread." Instead you misrepresented it as being important information that might have been of interest to me and, in doing so, perpetuated a stereotype.

*I* didn't do anything. At least pay attention to the author of the posts if you're going to criticize.

 

[thesauce]

Why not?

For the sake of your own sanity. Try to accept that you can't always get in the last word.

If the other thread hadn't been closed, a new thread wouldn't have been started. Frankly, I'd rather read threads correcting misinformation than a thread that asks us if it's sad that a poster spent a Saturday night in Anatomy lab. If you don't, then skip this thread. Don't police it.

But it WAS closed, and for good reason it seems. A subtle suggestion it's time to move on.

 

[Just Joshin]

For the sake of your own sanity. Try to accept that you can't always get in the last word.

But it WAS closed, and for good reason it seems. A subtle suggestion it's time to move on.

I don't really think posters should dictate what should or shouldn't be posted.

JMHO.

 

[fahimaz7]

Dude, why are you trying to be a jackass? With all the DO bashing that goes on here, I don't blame any DO students for wanting to set the record straight.

L2D's post and point was about the older generation of docs being discriminatory toward DOs since DOs didn't have practice rights as recently as the 1980s. That's incorrect. Why shouldn't someone say so?

P.S. I'm an MD student, but I would never hold it against DO students for wanting their profession to be accurately portrayed. Perhaps you think it shouldn't matter, but obviously, it does for some. So be it. Move on with your life.

I'm being a jackass? I'm actually being quite nice about this post, since we see this stupid MD vs DO argument several times a week, and I'm tired of people coming on SDN and ranting about the two different professions. While we're at it, why don't we just talk about women in medicine or perhaps AA's in medicine, since both of those groups were seen to be inferior practitioners and faced a long struggle to get to where they are today?

Seriously, even the DO administrators and faculty members/practitioners will tell you that there was a time, not that long ago, where DO's had a huge struggle to get to where they are today. Are there still struggles being waged, in terms of residency's, faculty positions, and administrator duties? Yes. With that said, it doesn't have any reflection on the current education that a graduate of PCOM is getting in the class of 2011, but it will be their responsibility to completely level the field between the two routes of medical education.

Here's a question for you.... Is there a difference between a ACGME residency and a AOA residency (generally speaking)?

Someone please lock this stupid thread or move it to the pre-med forums.

 

[Parietal Lobe]

Fahimaz7, I don't know what your problem is, but I'm not the one who started the MD versus DO argument. I merely replied to an inaccurate piece of information in the locked thread. You may think I didn't need to do that, but I felt I did and since I looked around and determined that what you like or don't like has no bearing on what I post, I decided to go for it.

If you don't like it, skip the thread. We all have that choice. But don't dictate what should or shouldn't be posted according to your own personal likes or dislikes. I'm sick of the MD vs. DO thing too, but what gets me more is inaccurate information being posted about the history of DOs. And even worse than that are holier-than-thou jerks like you who think that all SDN posters should adhere to their own personal rules and regulations for the forums. What bugs me may not bug you, but unless I'm banned or warned by the moderators, I will continue to post what I want.

Get over yourself.

 

[chiz2kul]

I'm being a jackass? I'm actually being quite nice about this post, since we see this stupid MD vs DO argument several times a week, and I'm tired of people coming on SDN and ranting about the two different professions. While we're at it, why don't we just talk about women in medicine or perhaps AA's in medicine, since both of those groups were seen to be inferior practitioners and faced a long struggle to get to where they are today?

Seriously, even the DO administrators and faculty members/practitioners will tell you that there was a time, not that long ago, where DO's had a huge struggle to get to where they are today. Are there still struggles being waged, in terms of residency's, faculty positions, and administrator duties? Yes. With that said, it doesn't have any reflection on the current education that a graduate of PCOM is getting in the class of 2011, but it will be their responsibility to completely level the field between the two routes of medical education.

Here's a question for you.... Is there a difference between a ACGME residency and a AOA residency (generally speaking)?

Someone please lock this stupid thread or move it to the pre-med forums.

just making it in before the lockdown. /dumb thread

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Fahimaz7, I don't know what your problem is, but I'm not the one who started the MD versus DO argument. I merely replied to an inaccurate piece of information in the locked thread.

Except that was the whole point of locking the thread...to avoid rehashing the same tired old argument that has been had a million times. Your unnecessary correction just started the cycle over again.

 

[Charles English]

not to fan the flames or anything,

but according to that link above, Nebraska fell in line 1989.

totally 80s

 

[Parietal Lobe]

Except that was the whole point of locking the thread...to avoid rehashing the same tired old argument that has been had a million times. Your unnecessary correction just started the cycle over again.

My correction had absolutely nothing to do with the argument. Since some people are set on starting the MD/DO war, no one can bring it up to correct misinformation?

 

[Parietal Lobe]

not to fan the flames or anything,

but according to that link above, Nebraska fell in line 1989.

totally 80s

Nebraska was a weird one. The way it was explained to me, NE offered full practice rights, then reneged in the 80s and finally past legislation in 1989. It was sort of a CA thing where DOs already had practice rights, but those rights were overturned, then re-instituted.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

My correction had absolutely nothing to do with the argument. Since some people are set on starting the MD/DO war, no one can bring it up to correct misinformation?

 

[Parietal Lobe]

A little cartoon to depict your state of mind? I notice you couldn't resist posting on this thread, twice.

 

[DrBowtie]

LOL, an ortho doc could make a killing in this thread with all the chipped scapulas.

 

[Jorski]

LOL, an ortho doc could make a killing in this thread with all the chipped scapulas.

This is awesome.

/endthread

 

[DrDrToBe]

😀 Good one!

 

[MCAT guy]

not to fan the flames or anything,

but according to that link above, Nebraska fell in line 1989.

totally 80s

lol, done and done.

I think everyone should stop worrying about this crap. Just do your own thing.

 

[fahimaz7]

A little cartoon to depict your state of mind? I notice you couldn't resist posting on this thread, twice.

You're making DO students look neurotic and obsessive. Just back away now and try to avoid entering these arguments in the future. Let your academic success do the talking, and put the effort and time that you waste in this conversation towards class, hobbies, or just sitting still and contemplating life.

 

[Dwindlin]

This thread. . .

[YOUTUBE]IOC-hDULX1c[/YOUTUBE]

 

[MedStudentWanna]

You're making DO students look neurotic and obsessive. Just back away now and try to avoid entering these arguments in the future. Let your academic success do the talking, and put the effort and time that you waste in this conversation towards class, hobbies, or just sitting still and contemplating life.

Dude, get a life. Seriously, a thread you don't like is that big a deal to you that you're ok acting like the world's biggest douche to tell people what they should or shouldn't post? You're making all MD students look like neurotic, self-absorbed, insecure pricks with your posts. Just chill out and get a life. Let people post what they want and if you don't want to read it, don't.

 

[fahimaz7]

Dude, get a life. Seriously, a thread you don't like is that big a deal to you that you're ok acting like the world's biggest douche to tell people what they should or shouldn't post? You're making all MD students look like neurotic, self-absorbed, insecure pricks with your posts. Just chill out and get a life. Let people post what they want and if you don't want to read it, don't.

Seriously.. I think that the OP has finally set the argument straight, and that SDN will never have another MD/DO thread now. Good to know.

I guess after 7 years of reading SDN, I get a little tired of the weakly threads about MD/DO, and how people feel like they have to justify the worth of their program/degree, by setting the record straight (or whatever these threads develop into).

If I was a mod, I would just close each of these pointless threads when they appear, or move them to the premed forum where people can turn this into a 500 post thread.

No MD student really cares what the DO guys are doing, nor do they care what specific year DO's were recognized as an alternative to the MD caregiver. We have our own things to worry about, and we have obviously decided that MD is the route that we are comfortable and confident to pursue, and I doubt that this thread has changed the minds of anyone on SDN.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

The good news is you're not a mod and the world can rejoice for that reason. I also notice your absence on the first thread about this where your comments may have been slightly relevant. No one in this thread is trying to change minds, unlike the other thread. Yet here you are. You just can't help yourself, dictating what should and shouldn't be posted and acting like a d-bag in doing so.

If you're so miserable in this thread, don't read it. Why do you insist on clicking on threads you're so sick of it? Are you that much a sadist? Or are you just itching for the chance to flex your muscles and order people around?

 

[fahimaz7]

The good news is you're not a mod and the world can rejoice for that reason. I also notice your absence on the first thread about this where your comments may have been slightly relevant. No one in this thread is trying to change minds, unlike the other thread. Yet here you are. You just can't help yourself, dictating what should and shouldn't be posted and acting like a d-bag in doing so.

If you're so miserable in this thread, don't read it. Why do you insist on clicking on threads you're so sick of it? Are you that much a sadist? Or are you just itching for the chance to flex your muscles and order people around?

Did you ever think that I didn't see the first post? Do you know any names to call me other than a douche bag? Which school are you at?

 

[MedStudentWanna]

What difference does it make what school I'm at?

 

[MossPoh]

Forgive me, but just before the thread closure, Law2Doc posted inaccurate information that, IMO, should be corrected.



This is wrong. The majority of states gave DOs unlimited practice rights -- equivalent to MDs -- before the end of WW II. The last state to do so was Mississippi and that was in 1973. Therefore, these doctors you're speaking of, the majority have retired. The few still in practice will be retiring very soon, I imagine, since they must be nearing 70 years old. Not sure where the reference to 1980 came from, but legally, DOs were recognized as equivalent to MDs with full unlimited practice rights well before 1980.

Well, the gist of what Law2Doc said was true. My dad started his MD in 1960. At that time, DO schools were viewed upon as the places bad students went because they couldn't get in anywhere else. They were really viewed upon in the same light as many of the lower end carribeans are now. They accepted too many students and had questionable teaching at best. Many of them had to overcme their poor education. They were also much more focused on OMM, which is still viewed upon with some skepticism by MDs (and some DOs). It wasn't until the mid-late 70s that the education truly began to rival allopathic schools. That doesn't mean there weren't ones before then, but they were kind of the exception rather than the rule.

My dad didn't even accept DOs as equal until we moved to the midwest where there was a much larger percentage of the workforce. Even then, it took some time since one of his partners (that happened to be a DO) reinforced his stereotype by being crappy at his job. Now it is a different story, but you have to realize that while they may have had prescribing rights, there were some questionable practices going on by many of them.

NDs can prescribe in some places, so I hardly consider prescribing rights the definitive standard for being a physician.

Oh, and starting threads like this is a good way to get your arse banned.

 

[DocEspana]

Hey! Everyone who felt they made a meaningful contribution to this thread:

Yea, 48 or 49 states had given full practicing rights by the late 60's/early70's. And almost all of them did so around the mid 1940's or earlier. Full practicing rights woo. Parietal lobe wished to make that information clear. Whether he should have made a new thread or not the thread would have been made by someone within 48 hours. Thats just how SDN works. This thread is like herpes, once you think its gone for good all you need is a stressful day at work and once you get home and turn on your computer you reach down (to your keyboard!) and there it is. Ugly, sickening and staring at you taunting your silly belief that it was dead. The point is, he would have been able to make this point within a day or two no matter what, so don't get so worked up that he started the thread up himself to start it. Leave the guy alone, he wanted factual accuracy.

Now onto parietal lobe. You are aware that 'full practicing rights' and five cents means you have a nickel, right? Full practicing rights is the most hollow thing you can possibly have since you had 1) no respect from the majority of the medical community 2) a completely openly admitted blacklist against you in most institutions and 3) full practicing rights only where you were given rights... so.... at your own office or in "DO Hospitals". The full practicing rights, while an accurate part of history, were not a *relevant* part of history.

The huge turning point was the military actively pulling DOs into their fold. As is the case with everything medical, the military are at the bleeding edge of the newest trends that will become the norm ~10 years later. That gave us legitimacy in the eyes of the medical system that 'full practicing rights' didnt. The impact of that event on the medical landscape was much more relevant than being given full practice rights across the US. The full practice rights were required for the military to be able to do what it did, but they in and of themselves did nothing.

btw: someone correct this if it's wrong, but there are no more DO hospitals. That is the *ultimate* sign that the profession has come to a happy acceptance all around. Sure old cronies may still exist, but they are few, far between, and their opinions are not based on fact but on anecdotal bias.

Now I officially declare /thread. PLEASE KILL THIS THREAD.

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

Posting before it gets the axe...

 

[Parietal Lobe]

Well, the gist of what Law2Doc said was true. My dad started his MD in 1960. At that time, DO schools were viewed upon as the places bad students went because they couldn't get in anywhere else. They were really viewed upon in the same light as many of the lower end carribeans are now. They accepted too many students and had questionable teaching at best. Many of them had to overcme their poor education. They were also much more focused on OMM, which is still viewed upon with some skepticism by MDs (and some DOs). It wasn't until the mid-late 70s that the education truly began to rival allopathic schools. That doesn't mean there weren't ones before then, but they were kind of the exception rather than the rule.

My dad didn't even accept DOs as equal until we moved to the midwest where there was a much larger percentage of the workforce. Even then, it took some time since one of his partners (that happened to be a DO) reinforced his stereotype by being crappy at his job.

While that story is valid, that wasn't my point. What I replied to was the claim that many older docs still discriminate against DO's because of how things were in the 80's. Your post did nothing to add to that discussion.

Now it is a different story, but you have to realize that while they may have had prescribing rights, there were some questionable practices going on by many of them.

I never said otherwise.

NDs can prescribe in some places, so I hardly consider prescribing rights the definitive standard for being a physician.

Again, I never said otherwise. My point was only that DO's had unlimited practice rights before the 1980's.

Oh, and starting threads like this is a good way to get your arse banned.

If the moderators want to ban me, they can. The Keystone Cops can rest easy and take a night off. Really guys, we don't need you policing the forums. The moderators do a fine job on their own.

 

[thesauce]

I don't really think posters should dictate what should or shouldn't be posted.

JMHO.

You've built quite a straw-man here. Posters do not dictate what should or shouldn't be posted, forum rules do. Several on here have given practical advice about not flogging a subject to death, which is hardly dictating what can be posted.

 

[Just Joshin]

You've built quite a straw-man here. Posters do not dictate what should or shouldn't be posted, forum rules do. Several on here have given practical advice about not flogging a subject to death, which is hardly dictating what can be posted.

I don't think it's straw-man at all considering certain posters have stated specifically that *they* don't like these threads and therefore, they shouldn't be posted. That isn't pointing out forum rules.

And anyway, since when is it posters' jobs to point out forum rules over and over again when moderators are present and reading?

 

[thesauce]

I don't think it's straw-man at all considering certain posters have stated specifically that *they* don't like these threads and therefore, they shouldn't be posted. That isn't pointing out forum rules.

That's just stating an opinion. Dictating would be saying that you can't do something, not that "they" don't think you should.

And anyway, since when is it posters' jobs to point out forum rules over and over again when moderators are present and reading?

I haven't seen anyone do this. Is this another straw-man?

 

[fahimaz7]

What difference does it make what school I'm at?

Is it a DO school?

 

[Just Joshin]

That's just stating an opinion. Dictating would be saying that you can't do something, not that "they" don't think you should.

Oh good lord, you're really going to enter a semantics pissing contest here. From you earlier in the thread:

You can't keep starting new thread severy time this happens

My point -- unless you're a mod, STFU and let people post what they want. No one has a gun to your head forcing you to read.

I haven't seen anyone do this. Is this another straw-man?

From your own post:

Posters do not dictate what should or shouldn't be posted, forum rules do.

Is that not an implication that the OP broke forum rules?

 

[Just Joshin]

Is it a DO school?

Try reading the thread, buddy. The poster said he's at an MD school.

 

[fahimaz7]

Try reading the thread, buddy. The poster said he's at an MD school.

You're right. I should remember what he said 10 posts above the last one, somewhere in between the other 200 things that I'm trying to learn/remember today. Thanks for pointing that out.

PS. He has a huge history of posting on DO threads, which is why I asked in the first place.

 

[Just Joshin]

PS. He has a huge history of posting on DO threads, which is why I asked in the first place.

Welcome to desegregated SDN. Many people mix and match.

Nice that you had the time to look up his post history and all those DO posts but refused to look up just a few posts above in this very thread to see if he was an MD or DO student.

 

[pingouin]

Given that the OP made his valid point, and that like the other thread, this is spiraling and going nowhere, I'm closing this one, too. No one has violated the TOS (yet), and no one is being banned. Or post held. Or put on probation. Or any of the other options Jolie and I would have if someone were consistently violating the TOS.