the Dr title...

[THP]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So to all the patients who swear that the chiropractor helps them, what would you say? Would you say, "I'm better than your chiropractor, even though he's helping you and I'm prescribing meds that don't seem to help you." I don't think chiropractic manipulation would do me a bit of good. But there are some that it helps...whether it is psychosomatic or not, they feel better. Their goal is to help people, just like ours is...it's not like their going town to town selling snake oil just to make money. They have a noble cause. So cut them a break and don't look down on them...science isn't everything...it can't explain everything. Maybe one day science will discover the reason behind why all these patients swear by their chiropractor.

I said I agreed with your 1st paragraph.

 

[Paperboy!]

I didn't spend six years in evil medical school to be called "mister."

 

[Paperboy!]

you shouldn't demand to be called "doctor" unless you call people with a masters "master"

 

[velo]

I say let them see a chiro if they think it helps, but don't let him do any c-spine manipulation--I haven't seen any good evidence that chiropractic manipulation provides a benifit and the harm of vertebral artery damage is pretty obvious.

side story: I went to the gym in my home town over break once and its one of those gyms where you have to sign in at the door. The guy in front of me was making some huge stink about the person greeting him as "Mr. X" when he felt he should be called doctor. He went on and on and towards the end dropped this gem, "I didn't go to school for all those years to become a chiropractor to be called "Mr."" I couldn't help myself from bursting out laughing and got a pretty dark glare...what a douche though...

 

[Jedix123]

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others....

If the man felt he should be called a doctor, then let him feel that way. But that doesn't change the fact that he's a douche-bag. This is regardless of whether he's M.D., O.D., PharmD., or otherwise.

 

[Firebird]

Thank you, Napolean.

 

[billclinton]

I said I agreed with your 1st paragraph.

yeah, well i am sure snake oil helped some people as well, based solely on the placebo.

On a side note, I recently came acrossed a thread in the podiatry forum where they think they should be included in the Medical Student forums because "they attend medical school to become physicians." Doesn't this seem along the same lines as above?

 

[Firebird]

The point was, people selling snake oil knew there was absolutely nothing medical about their product. They were just trying to rip people off. Chiropractors are convinced they are treating something, they just really don't know what.

 

[Ypo.]

The point was, people selling snake oil knew there was absolutely nothing medical about their product. They were just trying to rip people off. Chiropractors are convinced they are treating something, they just really don't know what.

Huh. Thats funny. Earlier I was talking with my SOs father and he used to interview a tribe of Indians in California who swore by a treatment for arthritis: putting a live rattlesnake in a bottle of alchohol and then rubbing the alcohol on their skin. My point is: if it works, and there aren't horrible side effects-patient will be happy, and doctor will be happy.

I get irritated with the whole MD/DO vs chiropracters. I suspect it has much more to do with competetition for patients than anything else. I just think its disgusting and unprofessional to knock other forms of health care.

As far as I know, most chiropracters at least know that they are treating back pain. 🙄

 

[velo]

...treatment for arthritis: putting a live rattlesnake in a bottle of alchohol and then....

...point is: if it works, and there aren't horrible side effects-patient will be happy, and doctor will be happy.

so you can't imagine any adverse events associated with handling live rattlesnakes?

 

[tupac_don]

I think we just saw a great example of this in the most recent The Bachelor.

He was billed as "Dr. Travis" or "the doctor from Nashville." And the girls were falling all over him because he is a doctor.

The dude is a resident at Vanderbilt. But obviously these girls (and the nation?) don't know the difference between residents and atendings.

Yea but really he is a doctor, technically and legally. Does he have his internship done, YES, does he have his step III done YES. Technically he is still not an attending, getting a doctor's salary YES. Also another thing is someone less of a doctor, if they are a fellow, vs someone who is an attending in internal medicine?

Even if he is a resident he is still a doctor, but he is not an attending, he doesn't make the big bucks, and he doesn't have the final say on things.

But really he is a DOCTOR.

 

[Ypo.]

so you can't imagine any adverse events associated with handling live rattlesnakes?

You missed my sentiment- I feel bad for the rattle snake. But, tell me...are you saying you can't imagine any adverse events associated with western treatments such as 'back surgery' (which hasn't been shown to be effective)? 😉 Let's contrast them: only about 3% of all rattle snake bites are fatal. Hmmm...I think I'm more comfortable with the rattlesnake.

 

[Hurricane]

You missed my cutting remark about the geekiness of doctoral candidates as exemplified by their love for Dungeons and Dragons.

I didn't say they wanted to be called "Doctor," just that they had a chip on their shoulder.

As far as what it takes to get a PhD, well, they are giving away doctoral degrees in fields like education, sociology, ethnic studies, and any number of intensely Mickey Mouse fields so the value of a PhD, like most things in our insipid, grade-inflated culture, is rapidly eroding.

All the doctoral candidates I knew slacked off most of the day, dressed like slobs, were pasty and out of shape, came in late and left early, and generally exhibited a tremendous lack of self-discipline. In short, just a bunch of over-grown college students.

Why such animosity towards PhDs? I worked my ass off for my PhD. Just as hard as for the MD, albeit in different ways. Just because they don't have to spend the night in the lab every 4th night doesn't mean PhD students are slackers. (Although there was a stretch when I came close!) Writing papers and grants and designing experiments isn't trivial stuff. Perhaps you think we're all slackers because doctoral work doesn't always require the "face time" medical school does. I did a lot of my writing and data analysis from home. So if you met me a few years ago, you'd probably think I was a slacker too, even though I was working 12 hours a day.

 

[Ypo.]

I think one reason chiropracters able to hold a place in the market is because at this time, we don't really know how to treat lower back pain effectively. Why do you think our patients bother taking that extra time out of their schedule to go pay a chiropracter instead of just getting treated at our offices?

 

[fun8stuff]

I think one reason chiropracters able to hold a place in the market is because at this time, we don't really know how to treat lower back pain effectively. Why do you think our patients bother taking that extra time out of their schedule to go pay a chiropracter instead of just getting treated at our offices?

Good point. My fiance's grandpa has back problems. He has had multiple operations that only relieved his pain temporarily. As a result, he has been to chiropractors, physical therapists, and acupuncturists. Out of these 3, physical therapy has been the best... but not really a complete solution.

 

[fun8stuff]

Why such animosity towards PhDs? I worked my ass off for my PhD. Just as hard as for the MD, albeit in different ways. Just because they don't have to spend the night in the lab every 4th night doesn't mean PhD students are slackers. (Although there was a stretch when I came close!) Writing papers and grants and designing experiments isn't trivial stuff. Perhaps you think we're all slackers because doctoral work doesn't always require the "face time" medical school does. I did a lot of my writing and data analysis from home. So if you met me a few years ago, you'd probably think I was a slacker too, even though I was working 12 hours a day.

What area did you get your PhD in? I would guess that it is in an area of biology, math, physical science, public health, etc. The people I know who are in these areas work plenty hard for the reasons you state.

However, I can't say I havent shared the same feelings as the previous poster about friends of mine in other areas. A girl I was friends with in high school is getting her PhD in woman's studies. As an outsider, it really seems like she does not have to that much work.... or not what I would consider work. I know another person who is getting their PhD in midevil studies... or something like that.... I mean, what kind of PhD's are these??? really? lol... I don't mean to belittle them though, because I really do not know what much about what is entailed. Sorry if I offended anyone!

 

[Firebird]

No one ever said a PhD in medieval studies was extraordinarily hard to get. The point is, they have a terminal degree in their respective field and therefore they are an expert. Just like after you finish your residency, you will be an expert in whatever discipline you choose.

 

[Ypo.]

No one ever said a PhD in medieval studies was extraordinarily hard to get. The point is, they have a terminal degree in their respective field and therefore they are an expert. Just like after you finish your residency, you will be an expert in whatever discipline you choose.

I'm planning on FP, but I don't think that I'll be an expert. If a PhD is someone who learns more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing, then an FP doc is someone who learns less and less about more and more until they know nothing about everything. 😀

I think there is a distinction between being an expert and a specialist. Thats not to say that a FP can't become an expert, (but I don't think it will occur during only three years of residency).

 

[fun8stuff]

No one ever said a PhD in medieval studies was extraordinarily hard to get. The point is, they have a terminal degree in their respective field and therefore they are an expert. Just like after you finish your residency, you will be an expert in whatever discipline you choose.

Actually....

"I worked my ass off for my PhD. Just as hard as for the MD," -hurricane

"All the doctoral candidates I knew slacked off most of the day, dressed like slobs, were pasty and out of shape, came in late and left early, and generally exhibited a tremendous lack of self-discipline. In short, just a bunch of over-grown college students." -Panda

I was merely making the comparison achieving a PhD in one subject, may not be as hard/easy as achieving in a PhD in another subject and that it seems the people I have known in the areas I have listed have had it pretty easy compared to those in the sciences. However, I most likely biased and I am only talking about a handful sized sample here.

However, it is definite that achieving a PhD should make you an expert in the field. ....but what if you PhD is from that Phoenix Online University?! Do they offer PhDs?! Lol....

 

[Hurricane]

but what if you PhD is from that Phoenix Online University?! Do they offer PhDs?! Lol....

I dunno, but I get spam emails on a weekly basis offering PhDs for the low price of $29.99. If only I had known...

Anyway, my PhD is in Neuroscience. I submit that cleaning out nasty disgusting rat cages and perfusing 36 rats in a day while covered in blood and paraformaldehyde and working until 2 AM several times a week to score nocturnal rodent behaviors is every bit as grueling as any scut I had to do on my hardest clinical clerkship. But whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger, right? 😉

I agree that a PhD in some of the "soft sciences" may not involve as much physical work as a PhD in the biosciences. But not all - archaeology digs or anthropology field work are probably very labor intense. And on the flip side, hard science PhDs in math or some fields of physics involve a lot of sitting on your ass in front of the computer. And I probably couldn't do the work required to research, formulate ideas and write a dissertation in medieval latin or women's studies or whatever, but I'm glad someone else wants to do it. Just because a PhD student doesn't keep the same schedule or do similar daily tasks as an MD student, it doesn't make their degree any less valid.

Still, there is something that all PhDs require, regardless of the field, and that is to produce, present and defend original work. The purpose of the MD OTOH is to gain a body of knowledge and demonstrate proficiency via a licensing process. Like a JD, it is a professional degree. Doesn't make one better or worse or less deserving of respect (or the Dr title) - they are different degrees. Viva la difference.

Now I forgot what my point was. Oh well, I don't care - I matched somewhere today! 🙂

 

[caroladybelle]

A girl I was friends with in high school is getting her PhD in woman's studies. As an outsider, it really seems like she does not have to that much work.... or not what I would consider work. I know another person who is getting their PhD in midevil studies... or something like that.... I mean, what kind of PhD's are these???

Well, they did earn the title of Doctor.....

But given the fact that most of them are probably working at Starbuck's, waiting bar or ringing up sales at Barnes and Nobles, it just doesn't sound all that good.

 

[timtye78]

I read through about 3 pages of your debate before I finally decided to chip in. So, in case my post repeats someone else's points, I am sorry.

First of all, if you have a doctorate in something, it is appropriate to assume the title 'Doctor X.' DCs, which I have seen describing themselves in ads, as 'chiropractic physicians' are allowed to call themselves doctors in the sense that they have doctorate, but to me a physician is a MD or DO. ND(nutrition doctorate). I heard of a CRNA (certified nurse anesthetist) who had a PhD who introduced himself as DrX to the pt, while not making the distinction....hmmm..I'll let you form your own opinion on that one..

As for the lawyer who recommends not introducing yourself as a doctor at social events trying to avoid a lawsuit is a little farfetched. You can be sued for anything, doctor or not. It seems a little ridiculous to HIDE the fact that you are a physician or physician resident, for fears of getting sued, while people are sitting down drinking beer and hotwings just because you casually mentioned that you are an MD and told them to ask their doctor about a sleeping medication. You aren't exactly assuming the doctor-patient relationship just because they know you are a doc.


Using the the title inside the hospital as an intern or resident is entirely appropriate, since it does imply MD/DO/DDS/DMD etc and your job is patient care, regardless of licensure status -'all' residents/interns are practicing medicine entirely legal, although terminology on the licenses may cary some variations-it boils down to-you have legal right to practice medicine under the supervision and guidance of your attendings at your institution.

As an intern/resident, you must introduce yourself as doctor, especially if you are assigned to that patient-guess what you are not the RN or the RT or cleaning person- You are doctor X-"What seems to be the problem, Ma'am?"
Your knowlege not sufficient-go find your attending. You are there to become that world-class ER doc, and you have the friggin MD on your wall...that degree is the only reason you are there anyway!

A state medical license is typically applied for after intern year, which is legally a 'full' medical license, which legally allows you to practice 'medicine' in that state. Malpractice insurance that covers you at your residency institution will not usually cover you if you sign up at some small town ER, for moonlighting, etc-you will have to obtain separate coverage.

Last point, the issue of when it is appropriate to use the title outside of the hospital is debateable (sp?). There are some people that do it because their egos are inflated or maybe even deficient, and thus desire respect that they crave. On the other hand, there are those who feel strongly that when they do use the title, eg in a restuarant, that they may get seated faster (I have found a ten dollar bill works better!) or they get treated better. Just be prepared for negative reactions sometimes instead of preferential treatment.

 

[synapse lapse]

Funny, My PT not MT could "cure" my chronic headaches like my DC did. I fail to see how you can sit there and say they can't do anything more than a MT. That statemnet just shows me how little you actually know about chiropractic and how much you think you know. NO DC's arn't MD's and should NOT be acting as such (im yet to find one that does). But, i don't like how you are giving these pre-meds a very one-sided view of the profession. If you would like to dicuss this further, i'd be happy to.

What premeds? This is a medical student forum for one, and I can't control who read it, nor should I care to. And if I am giving a one-sided view of the profession its because that is the only valid view. A large number of you have stated that studies have supported chriopractic techniques but not one has cited a source. You accept hear-say instead of fact. You charge me with knowing little about chiro when in fact I have done a good amount of research on the topic. Check out the wiki link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiropracter which is even written by chiros in support of the practice, and search for various literature on the subject befor e you charge me with knowing nothing about it. The fact is that chiro has no known mechanism for working, that cervical manipulation is known to be dangerous, and that it is not based on science. I don't think that such quakery should be referred to as medicine nor its practitioners physicians or doctors. If in fact I am incorrect than someone should be able to provide us evidence of if/why/how chiropracty works. No firebird we should not advise patients to seek placebo effects, and yes I believe if such techniques are potentially dangerous we should prevent them from being validated as medicine.

 

[8744]

What premeds? This is a medical student forum for one, and I can't control who read it, nor should I care to. And if I am giving a one-sided view of the profession its because that is the only valid view. A large number of you have stated that studies have supported chriopractic techniques but not one has cited a source. You accept hear-say instead of fact. You charge me with knowing little about chiro when in fact I have done a good amount of research on the topic. Check out the wiki link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiropracter which is even written by chiros in support of the practice, and search for various literature on the subject befor e you charge me with knowing nothing about it. The fact is that chiro has no known mechanism for working, that cervical manipulation is known to be dangerous, and that it is not based on science. I don't think that such quakery should be referred to as medicine nor its practitioners physicians or doctors. If in fact I am incorrect than someone should be able to provide us evidence of if/why/how chiropracty works. No firebird we should not advise patients to seek placebo effects, and yes I believe if such techniques are potentially dangerous we should prevent them from being validated as medicine.

Amen. Like I always say, if I referred my patients to a faith healer or a Pentacostal snake handler many of the advocates of the so-called alternative medicine would be up in arms.

If chiropractic works by placebo effect, then what's the difference between it and faith healing.

 

[billclinton]

I read through about 3 pages of your debate before I finally decided to chip in. So, in case my post repeats someone else's points, I am sorry.

First of all, if you have a doctorate in something, it is appropriate to assume the title 'Doctor X.' DCs, which I have seen describing themselves in ads, as 'chiropractic physicians' are allowed to call themselves doctors in the sense that they have doctorate, but to me a physician is a MD or DO. ND(nutrition doctorate). I heard of a CRNA (certified nurse anesthetist) who had a PhD who introduced himself as DrX to the pt, while not making the distinction....hmmm..I'll let you form your own opinion on that one..

As for the lawyer who recommends not introducing yourself as a doctor at social events trying to avoid a lawsuit is a little farfetched. You can be sued for anything, doctor or not. It seems a little ridiculous to HIDE the fact that you are a physician or physician resident, for fears of getting sued, while people are sitting down drinking beer and hotwings just because you casually mentioned that you are an MD and told them to ask their doctor about a sleeping medication. You aren't exactly assuming the doctor-patient relationship just because they know you are a doc.


Using the the title inside the hospital as an intern or resident is entirely appropriate, since it does imply MD/DO/DDS/DMD etc and your job is patient care, regardless of licensure status -'all' residents/interns are practicing medicine entirely legal, although terminology on the licenses may cary some variations-it boils down to-you have legal right to practice medicine under the supervision and guidance of your attendings at your institution.

As an intern/resident, you must introduce yourself as doctor, especially if you are assigned to that patient-guess what you are not the RN or the RT or cleaning person- You are doctor X-"What seems to be the problem, Ma'am?"
Your knowlege not sufficient-go find your attending. You are there to become that world-class ER doc, and you have the friggin MD on your wall...that degree is the only reason you are there anyway!

A state medical license is typically applied for after intern year, which is legally a 'full' medical license, which legally allows you to practice 'medicine' in that state. Malpractice insurance that covers you at your residency institution will not usually cover you if you sign up at some small town ER, for moonlighting, etc-you will have to obtain separate coverage.

Last point, the issue of when it is appropriate to use the title outside of the hospital is debateable (sp?). There are some people that do it because their egos are inflated or maybe even deficient, and thus desire respect that they crave. On the other hand, there are those who feel strongly that when they do use the title, eg in a restuarant, that they may get seated faster (I have found a ten dollar bill works better!) or they get treated better. Just be prepared for negative reactions sometimes instead of preferential treatment.

so are podiatrists physicians? i know some pod students that claim they are in medical school.

 

[OSUdoc08]

so are podiatrists physicians? i know some pod students that claim they are in medical school.

Chiropractors, Naturopaths, et. al. often claim they are physicians.

While they may certainly have the ability to prescribe drugs like a physician, noone other than an MD or a DO is licensed to treat (surgically & medically) the entire human body. There may be some exceptions in certain states, but since it is not true universally, then we must stick to the definition of a physician being an MD or DO.

DPM's will often discuss the idea that they have "specialized in the foot" much like an opthalmologist "specializes in the eye." The only problem with this is that after a year of internship, the opthalmology resident is licensed to treat the entire human body both medically and surgically. The DPM is never licensed to do this, even after fully completing his training.

 

[JustMyLuck]

Chiropractors, Naturopaths, et. al. often claim they are physicians.

While they may certainly have the ability to prescribe drugs like a physician, noone other than an MD or a DO is licensed to treat (surgically & medically) the entire human body. There may be some exceptions in certain states, but since it is not true universally, then we must stick to the definition of a physician being an MD or DO.

DPM's will often discuss the idea that they have "specialized in the foot" much like an opthalmologist "specializes in the eye." The only problem with this is that after a year of internship, the opthalmology resident is licensed to treat the entire human body both medically and surgically. The DPM is never licensed to do this, even after fully completing his training.

Podiatrists perform allopathic evidence-based medicine and surgery on the lower extremity. They do everything a ortho can do, only an ortho (MD or DO) can legally treat the whole body. So I would say that even though podiatrists cannot legally medically treat other areas of the body, they should still be considered "physicians"

FYI there is currently a bill pending that would include podiatrists under the definition of "physician."

 

[OSUdoc08]

There has never been a general consensus on this, but DPMs perform allopathic medicine and surgery on the lower extremities, therefore I think it is safe to call them "physicians"

See the above post. They aren't qualified to treat the entire body.

Perhaps we can call them...."quasi-physicians."

 

[JustMyLuck]

.

 

[billclinton]

See the above post. They aren't qualified to treat the entire body.

Perhaps we can call them...."quasi-physicians."

physician-wanabees --> physbees 😉

 

[Hurricane]

There is a raging are podiatrists considered physicians? debate already going on in the General Residency Issues forum. Can we please not rehash the entire thing here? 🙂

 

[Poety]

👍

Thanks for thinking I'm right. Ever since I got married, the phrase "I think you're right" has become sparse.

Actually I thought of a situation where I would want to be called doctor outside of a clinical situation. If I have a daughter, when she reaches the appropriate age of dating, her boyfriend better well call me "doctor" or "your highness" or something to that effect.

That's a joke, by the way.

Sort of.

Not really.

👍

I'm going for the "Dr., Your Hieness, Oh great woman that I'm trying to impress"

 

[krabmas]

Chiropractors, Naturopaths, et. al. often claim they are physicians.

While they may certainly have the ability to prescribe drugs like a physician, noone other than an MD or a DO is licensed to treat (surgically & medically) the entire human body. There may be some exceptions in certain states, but since it is not true universally, then we must stick to the definition of a physician being an MD or DO.

DPM's will often discuss the idea that they have "specialized in the foot" much like an opthalmologist "specializes in the eye." The only problem with this is that after a year of internship, the opthalmology resident is licensed to treat the entire human body both medically and surgically. The DPM is never licensed to do this, even after fully completing his training.

I thought only general surgeons could perform surgery on the whole body?

and some one else posted that the original definition of a physician was a person who medically treats patients without surgical interventions, making surgeons very different than physicians. some med schools are even called colleges of physicians and surgeons to make this distinction, that they are not the same.

and who cares if a podiatrist is a physician, called a phycisian by others, or staples a sign to their forehead that calls them that. I'm sure there are other pressing issues in the world that are more worth debating.

what ever the real truth is - it is. our debates here will not change that.

 

[OSUdoc08]

I thought only general surgeons could perform surgery on the whole body?

and some one else posted that the original definition of a physician was a person who medically treats patients without surgical interventions, making surgeons very different than physicians. some med schools are even called colleges of physicians and surgeons to make this distinction, that they are not the same.

and who cares if a podiatrist is a physician, called a phycisian by others, or staples a sign to their forehead that calls them that. I'm sure there are other pressing issues in the world that are more worth debating.

what ever the real truth is - it is. our debates here will not change that.

A resident in any specialty can. So can a medical student (ever heard of a surgery rotation?). There are people other than board certified general surgeons doing these surgeries. Residents in emergency medicine even do rotations in trauma surgery.

In addition, seperating the term physician & surgeon is outdated, and most schools have combined the name years ago. This is because upon completing step III of boards and obtaining licensure, all DO's & MD's are licensed physicians, regardless of specialty. You only become a surgeon, or a cardiologist, or a pathologist after completion of residency.

The reason they ahave been seperate in the past is that surgeons and physicians used to go to completely different schools. Physicians weren't allowed to perform surgery. A graduate of any MD or DO is capable of being a physician AND surgeon of the entire human body in modern times. Yes, they will not be as proficient as a board certified surgeon, but they ALL have the opportunity to train.

 

[jonwill]

A resident in any specialty can. So can a medical student (ever heard of a surgery rotation?). There are people other than board certified general surgeons doing these surgeries. Residents in emergency medicine even do rotations in trauma surgery.

No, podiatrists aren't doing these surgeries.

In addition, seperating the term physician & surgeon is outdated, and most schools have combined the name years ago. This is because upon completing step III of boards and obtaining licensure, all DO's & MD's are licensed physicians, regardless of specialty. You only become a surgeon, or a cardiologist, or a pathologist after completion of residency.

The reason they ahave been seperate in the past is that surgeons and physicians used to go to completely different schools. Physicians weren't allowed to perform surgery. A graduate of any MD or DO is capable of being a physician AND surgeon of the entire human body in modern times. Yes, they will not be as proficient as a board certified surgeon, but they ALL have the opportunity to train.

Podiatrists do not have this opportunity.

Podiatrists do get the opportunity. The major difference in general medical education vs podiatric medical education is the 3-4 year where pods generally stick to the foot and ankle. However, our residency does give us an opportunity to work with the entire body (I'm not suggesting that gives us the right to treat it). Though we specialize in the foot/ankle, it's imperative to get well rounded training. It definitely makes you a more competent doc. Below is a residency schedule for a program that I am considering. FYI

PGY 1
Podiatric Medicine and Surgery* - 2 month
Medical Imaging - 1 month
Pathology - 1 month
Medicine - 1 month
Emergency Medicine - 1 month
Infectious Diseases - 1 month
Anesthesia - 1 month
General Surgery - 1 month
Orthopaedic Surgery - 1 month
Psychiatry - 2 weeks
Electives (3)** - 1 month each

*Concurrent with other rotations
**Vascular surgery, family medicine, neurology, rheumatology, rehabilitative medicine, geriatrics, other rotations available

PGY 2-3
Podiatric Surgery - 3 months
Orthopaedic Surgery - 3 months
Orthopaedic Trauma - 3 months
Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle - 3 months
Sports Medicine - 3 months
Pediatric Orthopaedics- 3 months

 

[jonwill]

There is a raging are podiatrists considered physicians? debate already going on in the General Residency Issues forum. Can we please not rehash the entire thing here? 🙂

Raging is an understatement! Remember Rodney King's "can't we all just get along speech"?

 

[billclinton]

Raging is an understatement! Remember Rodney King's "can't we all just get along speech"?

hhahahaha

 

[Hurricane]

I thought only general surgeons could perform surgery on the whole body?

Not all body parts. I sure wouldn't want a general surgeon rooting around in my brain... 😱

What does it matter anyway? If I have a foot problem, I'll go see a podiatrist. I couldn't care less what they call themselves, as long as they are well-trained in all things feet.

 

[OSUdoc08]

Podiatrists do get the opportunity. The major difference in general medical education vs podiatric medical education is the 3-4 year where pods generally stick to the foot and ankle. However, our residency does give us an opportunity to work with the entire body (I'm not suggesting that gives us the right to treat it). Though we specialize in the foot/ankle, it's imperative to get well rounded training. It definitely makes you a more competent doc. Below is a residency schedule for a program that I am considering. FYI

PGY 1
Podiatric Medicine and Surgery* - 2 month
Medical Imaging - 1 month
Pathology - 1 month
Medicine - 1 month
Emergency Medicine - 1 month
Infectious Diseases - 1 month
Anesthesia - 1 month
General Surgery - 1 month
Orthopaedic Surgery - 1 month
Psychiatry - 2 weeks
Electives (3)** - 1 month each

*Concurrent with other rotations
**Vascular surgery, family medicine, neurology, rheumatology, rehabilitative medicine, geriatrics, other rotations available

PGY 2-3
Podiatric Surgery - 3 months
Orthopaedic Surgery - 3 months
Orthopaedic Trauma - 3 months
Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle - 3 months
Sports Medicine - 3 months
Pediatric Orthopaedics- 3 months

Sounds good, unfortunately, you will never have the opportunity to do this in practice.

Any MD or DO does have this opportunity, pending the completion of the appropriate residency.

 

[jonwill]

Sounds good, unfortunately, you will never have the opportunity to do this in practice.

Any MD or DO does have this opportunity, pending the completion of the appropriate residency.

I see your point but not exactly. We will do all of these as pertaining to the lower limb. For instance, we learn medical imaging very well because often times, radiologists don't feel comfortable reading our CT's, MRI's, etc (they can be really confusing if you don't see a lot of them). I had a patient last week where this was the case. We'll practice medicine and infectious disease as we manage our inpatients (especially the infected diabetic ulcer patients). I've been to the ER for foot/ankle trauma twice in the last three weeks. So it's important to learn these things because we use a lot of it.
On the other hand, if we have a complex inpatient, of course we're going to consult IM, cardio, etc. We're always referring to neuro for conduction and neuropathic issues. We referred a patient today to a vascular surgeon for a possible femoral bypass.
You're right, MD's and DO's will specialize in other things. And I've got no problem with referring to them and using them when necessary as they will be the experts in their respective field. But the key word is that you will all specialize in "one" of those things. I've yet to meet a doc that does anything on the entire body.
I guess the bottom line is that, if you know you want to specialize in the lower limb, podiatric medicine may be for you. If you don't know, I'd suggest going the MD/DO route as one has many more options, dependent upon performance of course.

 

[kirexhana]

i've only seen one person who was strict about being called doctor, and he was just a PhD teaching high school ap biology. he would yell at you for calling him Mr.

now that's an dingus.

.... that was my bio teacher in high school too... what school are you talking about? either it's the same person, or there are a lot of bio PhDs who feel that they're above teaching high school....

 

[edmadison]

Judges get called "judge XX" in all situations, why shouldn't "Dr.'s"??

Not really, you can also call them "your honor" or "sir" 😉