Time's article about DOs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

kutter

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Article on Time Magazine recently. I can not believe that this was not posted on SDN yet. Pretty much calls DOs shams!!!

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1584803,00.html

Are you mad? Drop them an email at [email protected] (include your home address and home phone number if you want to be printed).

Members don't see this ad.
 
"The "patients" who pay these docs run the gamut from the hopelessly deceived to the downright self-indulgent."

Holy Crap!!!
 
"Clever doctors watching their incomes melt away have taken notice, establishing all sorts of lucrative NRWAT practices. They've become chiropractors, osteopathic manipulators, prolotherapists, postural therapists, acupuncturists, even Therapeutic Touch practitioners. Each of these therapies proclaims the existence of force fields, bodily reactions, energies or auras that simply cannot be measured or observed scientifically. The "patients" who pay these docs run the gamut from the hopelessly deceived to the downright self-indulgent."

Pretty amazing they putt DOs into the same categories as the others. But makes sense when you consider the history of osteopathic medicine. If you haven't read Gevitz's book, "The DO's", I would recommend it.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Chill out, he raises some important points about the constant squeeze doctors have been getting, although it pisses me off that he seems to think only md's are doctors and everyone else is bs.
 
Okay? I was reading this expecting this big slam on DOs and then . . . a tiny whimper about OMT. Come on guys, it didn't trash talk DOs. All it did was compare the only dubious aspect of an otherwise very respectful profession to some other dubious practices. This wasn't ragging on DOs, just the part of DO training that most people never even use once there done anyway. Chill out. Most people don't even know what a DO is. To them, they are a doctor and that is what matters.
 
You can rely on my outrage and writing a letter about this.


However, he didn't say ALL DO's.

He said, "Osteopathic Manipulators." He took as shot at PM&R residency trained DO's and MD's...since PM&R is bigtime like AT Still.

So if you want to feel less victimized don't do OMM. That was a joke.

He's a weirdo....

Good points about money (My FP DO is going to buy a laser to shoot whatever hairs you want gone), (My PT/"PM&R" rotation is with a DO who was ER certified and got burnt out), though.
 
This guy seems pretty bitter, not to mention poorly educated about alternative, and in the case of osteopathy, not so alternative medicine. When did Time become a soapbox for anyone with an axe to grind?

Of course, Newsweek has much better outlook on DOs. "Hero, MD" anyone?
 
Ditto what Portier said.
But to add, what to you expect when you hear/see DOs doing crap like cranial therapy. It's a complete sham, and we're merely ASKING for it by endorsing such absolute garbage.
 
Article on Time Magazine recently. I can not believe that this was not posted on SDN yet. Pretty much calls DOs shams!!!

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1584803,00.html

Are you mad? Drop them an email at [email protected] (include your home address and home phone number if you want to be printed).

Actually, the article pretty much calls OMT a sham. Most DO's don't routinely perform OMT in practice, so most won't care. The biggest fallacy in the article is in suggesting that OMT is financially lucrative.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Actually, you can make a substanstial income providing OMT to your patients. Works just as anything else does...more billing codes (if justified) = more reimbursement. We had a lecture about the financial aspects of providing OMT so that we would consider using it in our practice.

Don't know that I could personally feel comfortable charging someone for OMT unless they came in specifically w/ a musculoskeletal complaint, but there are plenty of people who would argue that you could find & justify something on 80%+ of your patients....

**To the OP, unclench d-bag. One line about OMT & you get all worked up??
 
I think this article raises some great points. Nobody wants to pay for legitimate healthcare services but they will pay for cosmetic treatments and snakeoils. He does take a shot at chiropractors and OMT but I don't know that this unfair. It is OK to engage in a debate about these modalities. How is challenging the virtue of OMM any different than challenging the long-term outcomes of gastric bypass surgery?

Doctors are under immense financial, legal, and regulatory pressures and it is not surprising that we will seek out and provide services for which we will be well reimbursed. That is pure economics and capitalism. Where there is demand there will be supply.

But I wonder who will take care of the patients while we are all zapping each other's hair follicles. Would I feel guilty about offering these services after reading that article? Absolutely not! In fact, the article only raised my interest in obtaining one of these "lasers" (as Dr. Evil would say). If Medicare is going to pay me only $87 per hour (don't forget to subtract overhead off that either) to anesthetize its patients, why take less money and more risk than zapping hair for $300/hour? Seems like a no-brainer to me. But then doctors aren't supposed to care about money, we are supposed to be idealists (like the CEOs of insurance companies). :)
 
i agree with many of the posts above. this article doesn't angry me at all. while the author may be somewhat misinformed, he does bring up some disturbing (and true) points about the future of medicine. it is astonishing that so many talented people continue to flock to this profession when such a dismal future is painted time and again by those already in the profession.

i believe that the author of this article was referring to some of the dubious aspects of OMT...when doctors are suggesting that they need to perform OMT on all of their patients (for extra $)

i have been to several D.O.'s myself and none have ever tried to perform OMT. of course, i never went for any musculoskeletal complaints either. then i would expect them to perform it. i also would expect them to refer me to the appropriate specialists (PM&R or ortho) if necessary. same thing i would expect from an MD (except for the OMT of course)

D.O.'s and the governing powers that be need to make this more clear to the general population and clear up misconceptions. OMT is an additional skill taught in D.O. schools. i would agree that if someone wanted to perform OMT on me for my ingrown toenail that it is a sham. and i would also agree that when a doctor suggests a certain drug because of enormous kickbacks, that this could also be a sham (both MD and DO are guilty) especially when a cheaper alternative may work just as well.

we have two options when faced with people who are uneducated about aspects such as this: 1) educate them 2) ignore them and let them go on and make fools of themselves.

this is of course my opinion and everyone knows what they say about those...
 
i agree with many of the posts above. this article doesn't angry me at all. while the author may be somewhat misinformed, he does bring up some disturbing (and true) points about the future of medicine. it is astonishing that so many talented people continue to flock to this profession when such a dismal future is painted time and again by those already in the profession.

i believe that the author of this article was referring to some of the dubious aspects of OMT...when doctors are suggesting that they need to perform OMT on all of their patients (for extra $)

i have been to several D.O.'s myself and none have ever tried to perform OMT. of course, i never went for any musculoskeletal complaints either. only then i would expect them to perform it. i also would expect them to refer me to the appropriate specialists (PM&R or ortho) if necessary. same thing i would expect from an MD (except for the OMT of course)

D.O.'s and the governing powers that be need to make this more clear to the general population and clear up misconceptions. OMT is an additional skill taught in D.O. schools. i would agree that if someone wanted to perform OMT on me for my ingrown toenail that it is a sham. and i would also agree that when a doctor suggests a certain drug because of enormous kickbacks, that this could also be a sham (both MD and DO are guilty) especially when a cheaper alternative may work just as well.

we have two options when faced with people who are uneducated about aspects such as this: 1) educate them 2) ignore them and let them go on and make fools of themselves.

this is of course my opinion and everyone knows what they say about those...
 
Agree with most of the above. This wasn't a DO slam, it was an OMT slam. And it was probably deserved. OMT has some utility, but not to the extent that some DOs/students like to believe --> cranial.
 
Anyone notice it was an M.D. who wrote the article?
 
I'm sorry but if you don't agree with this article, you are whats wrong with osteopathy
 
Agree with most of the above. This wasn't a DO slam, it was an OMT slam. And it was probably deserved. OMT has some utility, but not to the extent that some DOs/students like to believe --> cranial.

Right on, people need to lighten up about this $hit. He made a valid point. There is not one person on here that would choose OMT for Otitis Media over ABX. Get real it isn't for everything, despite what your OPP dept tells you.

Q
NSU-2009
 
D.O.'s and the governing powers that be need to make this more clear to the general population and clear up misconceptions
Unfortunately it is the "powers that be" that propagate, support, and encourage the misconceptions...
 
The author is an orthopedic surgeon. He doesnt make money on any patient who isnt in his office with a problem that "only surgery" can fix. Anyone or anything that threatens to help a patient in a non operative manner is a threat to his business.

So he took a shot at OMT. Big deal. I get Time (came free with a membership to Public Radio) and even I didnt read that article. Osteopathic medicine will survive this most recently cold blooded, calculated attack at the livelihood of less than 1% of DOs.
 
The author is an orthopedic surgeon. He doesnt make money on any patient who isnt in his office with a problem that "only surgery" can fix. Anyone or anything that threatens to help a patient in a non operative manner is a threat to his business.

So he took a shot at OMT. Big deal. I get Time (came free with a membership to Public Radio) and even I didnt read that article. Osteopathic medicine will survive this most recently cold blooded, calculated attack at the livelihood of less than 1% of DOs.

:thumbup:

Although I will say that it is unfortunate that he takes a shot without having to back up his claims with fact.

THE FACT is that osteopathic medicine is currently trying to give OMT scientific basis. Pending such extensive research it is irresponsible to make sweeping generalizations about the efficacy of OMT.
 
Here is what the President of the AOA had to say about it.

February 5, 2007

Letters to the Editor
TIME Magazine
Time-Life Building
Rockefeller Center
New York, NY 10020-1393

Dear Editor:

I'm deeply disappointed in the negative portrayal given by Scott Haig, M.D., of osteopathic physicians (D.O.s) or "osteopath manipulators" as he calls them in his article "Doctors Without Dollars" (Feb. 2, 2007). With nearly 47 million uninsured Americans, why would you devalue an entire medical profession - especially one that is rooted in producing family physicians who practice in rural and urban medically underserved areas?

As one of only two groups of physicians in the U.S. who are fully licensed to prescribe medicine and practice in all specialty areas, D.O.s face the same struggles that M.D.s do - and apparently more with inaccurate depictions like the one in this article.

In fact, D.O.s have been advocating for solutions to issues such as Medicare physician reimbursement cuts and medical liability insurance increases so that the future generations of physicians have fewer obstacles to overcome.

To lump osteopathic physicians in the NRWAT or the "nothing-really-works-anyway-therapies" group is a disservice to the 59,000 D.O.s who have served the medical needs of Americans across the nation. Furthermore, I doubt that Dr. Haig would put the former physician to President George H.W. Bush, the former surgeon general of the U.S. Army and the physicians for professional sports teams such as the Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs - all of whom are D.O.s - into that group.

Moreover, D.O.s are not just "manipulators." They are physicians who receive extra training to use their hands to diagnose and treat their patients using a technique called osteopathic manipulative treatment in addition to delivering babies, performing brain surgery or serving as family physicians to the underserved. If you are interested in learning the facts about D.O.s and osteopathic medicine, I urge you to visit www.osteopathic.org.

Sincerely,
John A. Strosnider, D.O.
 
"powers that be" that propagate, support, and encourage the misconceptions

*cough* AOA *cough*
 
Here is what the President of the AOA had to say about it.

February 5, 2007

Letters to the Editor
TIME Magazine
Time-Life Building
Rockefeller Center
New York, NY 10020-1393

Dear Editor:

I'm deeply disappointed in the negative portrayal given by Scott Haig, M.D., of osteopathic physicians (D.O.s) or "osteopath manipulators" as he calls them in his article "Doctors Without Dollars" (Feb. 2, 2007). With nearly 47 million uninsured Americans, why would you devalue an entire medical profession - especially one that is rooted in producing family physicians who practice in rural and urban medically underserved areas?

As one of only two groups of physicians in the U.S. who are fully licensed to prescribe medicine and practice in all specialty areas, D.O.s face the same struggles that M.D.s do - and apparently more with inaccurate depictions like the one in this article.

In fact, D.O.s have been advocating for solutions to issues such as Medicare physician reimbursement cuts and medical liability insurance increases so that the future generations of physicians have fewer obstacles to overcome.

To lump osteopathic physicians in the NRWAT or the "nothing-really-works-anyway-therapies" group is a disservice to the 59,000 D.O.s who have served the medical needs of Americans across the nation. Furthermore, I doubt that Dr. Haig would put the former physician to President George H.W. Bush, the former surgeon general of the U.S. Army and the physicians for professional sports teams such as the Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs - all of whom are D.O.s - into that group.

Moreover, D.O.s are not just "manipulators." They are physicians who receive extra training to use their hands to diagnose and treat their patients using a technique called osteopathic manipulative treatment in addition to delivering babies, performing brain surgery or serving as family physicians to the underserved. If you are interested in learning the facts about D.O.s and osteopathic medicine, I urge you to visit www.osteopathic.org.

Sincerely,
John A. Strosnider, D.O.
Did someone finally get that man on the appropriate medications?
 
Surprise doesn't even cut it here!!! Strosnider finally put out a well written letter that I think 99%+ of DO's can support.

I'm completely dumbfounded....
 
Here is what the President of the AOA had to say about it.

February 5, 2007

Letters to the Editor
TIME Magazine
Time-Life Building
Rockefeller Center
New York, NY 10020-1393

Dear Editor:

I'm deeply disappointed in the negative portrayal given by Scott Haig, M.D., of osteopathic physicians (D.O.s) or "osteopath manipulators" as he calls them in his article "Doctors Without Dollars" (Feb. 2, 2007). With nearly 47 million uninsured Americans, why would you devalue an entire medical profession - especially one that is rooted in producing family physicians who practice in rural and urban medically underserved areas?

As one of only two groups of physicians in the U.S. who are fully licensed to prescribe medicine and practice in all specialty areas, D.O.s face the same struggles that M.D.s do - and apparently more with inaccurate depictions like the one in this article.

In fact, D.O.s have been advocating for solutions to issues such as Medicare physician reimbursement cuts and medical liability insurance increases so that the future generations of physicians have fewer obstacles to overcome.

To lump osteopathic physicians in the NRWAT or the "nothing-really-works-anyway-therapies" group is a disservice to the 59,000 D.O.s who have served the medical needs of Americans across the nation. Furthermore, I doubt that Dr. Haig would put the former physician to President George H.W. Bush, the former surgeon general of the U.S. Army and the physicians for professional sports teams such as the Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs - all of whom are D.O.s - into that group.

Moreover, D.O.s are not just "manipulators." They are physicians who receive extra training to use their hands to diagnose and treat their patients using a technique called osteopathic manipulative treatment in addition to delivering babies, performing brain surgery or serving as family physicians to the underserved. If you are interested in learning the facts about D.O.s and osteopathic medicine, I urge you to visit www.osteopathic.org.

Sincerely,
John A. Strosnider, D.O.

That's pretty well written.
 
:love: the AOA, they serve us well on this occasion! I agree that his response was well written!:thumbup:
 
WOW!!! And there isn't even one insulting insinuation that MD's only treat symptoms not people...or that DO's have a monopoly on treating people with compassion, empathy, or as a whole!!!
But in all honesty, do you think this letter made it past the high-school graduate who's paid $5.50/hr by TIME to read the massive amount of emails they get everyday?

DKMurphy...that's pretty funny!!!
 
I really do think its a negative impression of DO's and it seems like he doesn't know much about what DO is all about
 
Actually, you can make a substanstial income providing OMT to your patients. Works just as anything else does...more billing codes (if justified) = more reimbursement. We had a lecture about the financial aspects of providing OMT so that we would consider using it in our practice.

Being able to bill for it doesn't necesaarily guarantee you'll get paid for it. Medicare will reimburse for it a a procedure, but some private insurers do not routinely reimburse for the OMT charge. If you submit a bill for an office visit and a procedure, many times the insurance company will pay for either one or the other (whichever fee is lowest, of course) but not for both. You can supplement your practice with some extra income with OMT, but it is not more lucrative than providing standard medical care.

The author doesn't seem to acknowledge that a practicing D.O., even one who chooses to solely utilize OMT for all care delivered, still has a significant malpractice burden, licensure requirements, and overhead comparable to a standard medical doctor. That is why you really cannot compare therapeutic touch by a naturopath to cranial sacral therapy by a D.O. for the purpose of what this author is trying to convey. The standard of care for a D.O. is much higher than these other alternative providers, and this brings a significant financial burden along with it.
 
Well, so long as I may have to attend a DO program......you are correct. :laugh:

Yeah yeah yeah

Lets see if you can get into medical school before you start getting TOO mouthy!

:D
 
Luckily it was just an opinion, not a factual article. And I don't feel that he's really bashing D.O.s, he's just bashing certain procedures that don't have a whole lot of research-backed evidence going for them. Many M.D.s also do prolo, acupuncture, etc, so he's not really singling out D.O.s
 
He just put osteopathic manipulation...how many DOs actually perform Osteopathic Manipulation. I'm at a Osteopathic hospital and its minimal...there is a consult service. Not even a OMM residency at my osteopathic hospital. I'll do rib raising and some soft tissue stuff, not exactly doing cranial.

In general, even if Time bashed DOs, you'll still have patients...most people who you will see won't care, if they do, they'll want an MD or another DO (who they don't know is one) and it wont' matter cause they are a bitch to treat anyway cause they'll be high maintenance.

At my DO school, there are MDs who do practice acupuncture and alternative and complementary medicine...so that article bashes them.
 
Dont encourage him.

:laugh:

No worries JP.....I've said what I wanted to say. :thumbup:

Somehow I think you will NEVER say all you wanted to say.

;)

Well, so long as I may have to attend a DO program......you are correct. :laugh:

Yeah yeah yeah

Lets see if you can get into medical school before you start getting TOO mouthy!

:D

Will you two lovebirds get a room? :rolleyes:
 
"There is not one person on here that would choose OMT for Otitis Media over ABX."

Why, in a great many circumstances, would you pick abx over nothing other than some topical pain meds +/- OMT. Is there evidence that abx are useful for the majority of AOM? Moreso than the evidence for OMT as an adjunctive tx for AOM (as it was only studied as such, not as a primary modality)?
 
Maybe I'm in denial, but I didn't see that as a rub against our degree. I think of it more in the light of ANY doctor taking a massotherapy course and then selling their "osteopathic manipulation" skills, particularly the MD's that do so.

Period.

I gotta go do a pelvic and give some lasix and then a blood transfusion and dermabond some dude's head lac. Oh yeah, and go to my OMT lecture. And get free lunch.

:sleep:
 
Top