daveyboy said:
I actually was only using that quote to show that this debate has been going on for a really long time. Other than that I wasn't trying to substantiate any particular point with it.
The quotes you used from Gevitz are quite nice, BTW. I have always enjoyed reading about the history of the proffession. In fact, that was one of the things that attracted me as a pre-med.
I have to take issue with whether or not OMT has been scientifically proven for 2 reasons. 1) The Scientific Method is not used to prove anything. This may be a matter of semantics, but there is no such thing as scientfic proof or a scientific fact. 2) All of OMT has not been shown to be effective, only a few modalities have. Some of it has recently been shown to be detrimental in certain instances(hip manipulation in post-op hip replacement patients). The reality is that there is simply not enough research with OMT to say whether or not it is effective, although there is enough anecdotal evidence to warrant the further investigation that is taking place.
That being said, I am behind in my studies, and I am going to be leaving this debate. I have enjoyed debating you and apologize for my rude behavior last night. Whether or not we agree, I do respect the fact that you have an opinion on this subject and that you actively voice it. I encourage you to consider getting involved with OMT research at some level if you are not already.
Thanks, I have been shadowing an FP DO who uses a lot of OMT. The expression on his patient's faces as they feel relief from chronic pain, and the excercises he teaches them which prevent them from having a reoccurence have been "scientific" proof enough to me that it is effective for Sciatica, Shoulder pain, and neck pain at least.
I do wonder how you think OMT will ever be proved if there is no such thing as scientific fact or proof- how do you expect OMT (or anything for that matter to be proved by scientific study)? I admire your healthy scepticism, but as someone else pointed out, -MDs and researchers often don't know
how a drug works- they just see it has an effect in reducing symptoms. The same is true for OMT-maybe we don't know how it works, and maybe it causes bad effects in someone who just had hip surgery(which seems really obvious to begin with), but we see that it works in relieving pain and correcting some other types of misalignments. And, don't many drugs (that they do not understand) cause bad side effects, too? And sometimes those drugs don't help a person at all, but instead cause more damage, and a new treatment plan must be implemented by the physician as things get more and more complicated. And don't DOs who use OMT do the same thing (learn from their experiences?) the answer is yes. How healing are modern day medicines, truly? What do MDs have to lean on when they accuse OMT of not being thoroughly tested-when they make decisions that are detrimental to their patients every day-and obviously not tested on that patient "well, we'll try you on Lipitor, and if that doesn't work or it has bad side effects we'll try something else" I've heard comments like this EVERYTIME I shadowed DOs and MDs.
And I would like you to consider the possibility that maybe traditional medicine is using unreasonable criteria for why it refuses to accept the efficacy of OMT and that it is doing so for less than admirable reasons (I'll leave it up to you to decide what they may be). If trad med used the same stringent requirements and criticisms that for drug testing and research...well then, maybe I would shut my trap. Traditional med has a long history of oppressing other forms of medicine (midwifery, homeopathic, alternative...) -and that behavior continues today, albeit on a more subtle level. I'm reading this book by Gevitz-and its uncanny to me how you can still detect attitudes that were there a hundred years ago (on both sides). Now, after years of struggling for respect from MDs, instead of discrediting DOs, they want to assimilate them (thus making them lose their individuality and the threat to "trad med"). As an advocate of osteopathic medicine, I would hate to see you unwittingly support this kind of biased and oppressive thought. Its important to maintain our individuality from the MDs and the giants who represent them-Why? If for no other reason, to make sure patients have more than one legitimate health care option! (and to ensure that those with slightly lower MCAT scores can still become physicians, and that there will be medical schools who truly look at the whole person, instead of just saying that they do).
I know you are busy and have wasted too much time on this forum (I have lots of free time as I just moved and am looking for a job), but I hope you'll read this last post and think about it, or maybe someone else will, at least.
It was quite a pleasure tossing ideas with you. Good luck with your studies!
I believe it is possible but I don't have knowledge in the area. Maybe if you ask a practicing DO they may know more about it.
