What do aspiring and current M.Ds think of D.Os now?

[SkipJunior]

It's undeniable that the field of osteopathic medicine has had a huge boom in growth over the past 20 years. In the process, the admissions standards and reputation of D.O schools have gone up as well. For example, Midwestern-AZ, a D.O school, is not interviewing anyone with a MCAT score below 29 at this time in the app cycle. Compare that to MD schools like Meharry, University of New Mexico, University of West Virginia, Ponce etc who accept people with MCAT scores between 23-26. Just one example.

Even the New York Times agrees that "D.O is In Now" published in July 29 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/e...athic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?_r=0

I'm not trying to compare M.Ds and D.Os but I'm tired of pre-meds knocking down D.O and considering it to be easy to get into a D.O program. That may have been the case even 10 years ago but it's not true now. D.Os are becoming mainstream and are equal to M.Ds.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[IslandStyle808]

It's undeniable that the field of osteopathic medicine has had a huge boom in growth over the past 20 years. In the process, the admissions standards and reputation of D.O schools have gone up as well. For example, Midwestern-AZ, a D.O school, is not interviewing anyone with a MCAT score below 29 at this time in the app cycle. Compare that to MD schools like Meharry, University of New Mexico, University of West Virginia, Ponce etc who accept people with MCAT scores between 23-26. Just one example.

Even the New York Times agrees that "D.O is In Now" published in July 29 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/e...athic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?_r=0

I'm not trying to compare M.Ds and D.Os but I'm tired of pre-meds knocking down D.O and considering it to be easy to get into a D.O program. That may have been the case even 10 years ago but it's not true now. D.Os are becoming mainstream and are equal to M.Ds.

Not the pre-med's knocking it down really its the allopathic medical students (only a certain group). Some reason of their reasons are valid, some aren't.

 

[EMDO2018]

Probably not smart to make this kind of thread if you are "probationary status".

Anywho, DOs students are cool smart people who have the ability to succeed in med school just like their MD counterparts. A lot of the new DO schools however ( and some of the established ones), are a bit rough- the clinical years are not up to par. Nice shot at Meharry btw, just because a school admits students with lower MCAT scores doesn't mean its a bad school, and vice versa. Meharry actually has a program where most of their students do research at Vanderbilt.

 

[jakeislove]

Probably not smart to make this kind of thread if you are "probationary status".

Anywho, DOs students are cool smart people who have the ability to succeed in med school just like their MD counterparts. A lot of the new DO schools however ( and some of the established ones), are a bit rough- the clinical years are not up to par. Nice shot at Meharry btw, just because a school admits students with lower MCAT scores doesn't mean its a bad school, and vice versa. Meharry actually has a program where most of their students do research at Vanderbilt.

It's against some unwritten forum rule to discuss the topic without mentioning Meharry, LOL!

 

[NickNaylor]

I actually discussed this with a mentor of mine, and his response was somewhat surprising to me. He's not a fan of DO programs; from his perspective, he sees it as diluting the qualifications of physicians and giving people an opportunity to become physicians that perhaps shouldn't really be doing so. He cites the mean GPA and MCAT differences between the two as his example. While threads like this almost always conjure up at least one "I'm doing DO rather than MD because I like the philosophy," the reality is that I have yet to come across someone who could've gotten into an MD school yet chose to go DO. That just doesn't exist in my world.

All that said, I've worked with some excellent DOs as supervising residents. One of the best residents I worked with during third year was a DO. Ultimately I don't think one pathway is clearly "superior" or "inferior," and at the end of the day you'll still be a physician. However, there are certain pragmatic considerations that aspiring DO students should be aware of (e.g., the difficulty of getting into competitive ACGME residencies and the generally limited availability of specialty/subspecialty training in AOA programs compared to ACGME programs), and there certainly seems to be a vague but still present stigma against DOs compared to MDs. I don't buy into it all that much but it's certainly out there. You can be an excellent physician as a DO, and you can be a terrible physician as a MD. The degree doesn't define you or your skills.

 

[Low Flow]

I certainly agree with the above poster that there is a certain degree of stigma between DO and MD. Although it's much less than it used to be, and with the merger, perhaps it will diminish to negligible levels in the near future?

Anywho, I just interviewd at a DO school yesterday and absolutey loved it. I'm interviewing at an MD school in the near future and I will have a hard decision should I be lucky enough to get an acceptance to both.

Another thing, one of my interviewers went to a DO school, then did an MD neurology residency, so you can certainly take any path as a DO. The majority of patients don't even know the difference between DO and MD anyway; I know I certainly didn't before applying to medical school.

 

[mik30102]

As someone who has worked with both kinds of residents, and shadowed both kinds of physicians they are identical in practice.

 

[Psai]

You go DO if you didn't get MD. If you don't get DO either, you go Caribbean. It's as simple as that.

 

[Flashfan]

I know someone who got into MD and DO and chose the DO simply on location. He didn't want to be stuck in a bad part of the state when he could be in Indy. The new DO school is working closely with our state med school anyway (same anatomy professors, etc) so he thought he would be better off. As of now he is happy. We shall see when the first MS3 rotations happen next year.

 

[SkipJunior]

I'm not trying to compare MD and DOs with this thread or start a fight. For example, although I stated AZCOM and Meharry earlier, there are also D.O schools like Liberty that accept people with low MCAT and tons of MD schools like Harvard etc. that only accept people with high MCAT. However, my main question is this, do you think the stigma against DO programs have gone down over the past 10 years?

 

[SkipJunior]

I know someone who got into MD and DO and chose the DO simply on location. He didn't want to be stuck in a bad part of the state when he could be in Indy. The new DO school is working closely with our state med school anyway (same anatomy professors, etc) so he thought he would be better off. As of now he is happy. We shall see when the first MS3 rotations happen next year.

This is my point exactly. The stigma against DO programs have gone down to the point where factors like location are now more important than the reputation of the DO programs. Who knows, maybe 20 years ago, the person you know may have chosen MD due to the worse reputation of DO at that time.

 

[SkipJunior]

Not the pre-med's knocking it down really its the allopathic medical students (only a certain group). Some reason of their reasons are valid, some aren't.

In my experience in the real world and in SDN, some pre-meds don't even consider D.O because they think it's too below them. That and the prevailing notion that people only go D.O when they are rejected from M.D makes me very mad and sad.

 

[Goro]

I interview them and they exist in mine. I've had students turn down Northwestern, UCSF (yes, really) and U South FL, to name a few. the rule of thumb is that like like our school's mission and/or they've have bad experiences with allopathic medicine but were helped by a DO.

Overall, I've noticed a more accepting nature in the pre-allo thread for DO within just the past two years. Forcing the Spring, I guess.


While threads like this almost always conjure up at least one "I'm doing DO rather than MD because I like the philosophy," the reality is that I have yet to come across someone who could've gotten into an MD school yet chose to go DO. That just doesn't exist in my world.

 

[VanEman]

Most of the physicans I know, whether MD or DO, realize that America is not producing enough doctors, even WITH DO schools, to fill the need we have. So what do we do? Steal MD's from countries like India, where they are desperately needed by their own country in spite of the fact they never had to face an MCAT test. Why should someone be willing to be treated by an MD from a different country with NO MCATS instead of being treated by an American physician who came in the top half of those who took the test? It's irrational, but so are some MD's.

 

[SkipJunior]

Probably not smart to make this kind of thread if you are "probationary status".

Anywho, DOs students are cool smart people who have the ability to succeed in med school just like their MD counterparts. A lot of the new DO schools however ( and some of the established ones), are a bit rough- the clinical years are not up to par. Nice shot at Meharry btw, just because a school admits students with lower MCAT scores doesn't mean its a bad school, and vice versa. Meharry actually has a program where most of their students do research at Vanderbilt.

I don't think I did anything wrong by starting this thread. I had a valid question and I backed it up with evidence.

When you say a lot of new DO schools have sub-par clinical years, I think you do a disservice to new DO schools. For example, a lot of people were doubtful of Campbell because it didn't have any clinical rotations set up. However it just recently signed an agreement with Novant Health teaching hospital and is expected to provide excellent clinical training to its students.

http://www.campbell.edu/news/item/c...spital-agreement-with-novant-health-rowan-med

New schools do have teething problems but most of them are striving to improve themselves.

I agree that schools that admits students with low MCAT scores are not bad schools.....however that's the precise reason why pre-meds, physicians etc look down upon D.O schools... because they accept students with lower MCAT scores. So you just validated my point.

 

[Ismet]

This is my point exactly. The stigma against DO programs have gone down to the point where factors like location are now more important than the reputation of the DO programs. Who knows, maybe 20 years ago, the person you know may have chosen MD due to the worse reputation of DO at that time.

Yes the stigma has decreased and is still decreasing. But as you can see from a couple posts in this thread, the stigma still persists.

 

[SkipJunior]

Most of the physicans I know, whether MD or DO, realize that America is not producing enough doctors, even WITH DO schools, to fill the need we have. So what do we do? Steal MD's from countries like India, where they are desperately needed by their own country in spite of the fact they never had to face an MCAT test. Why should someone be willing to be treated by an MD from a different country with NO MCATS instead of being treated by an American physician who came in the top half of those who took the test? It's irrational, but so are some MD's.

I agree, though it's more likely that a Caribbean medical school graduate (0f which there are thousands every year) will match into a US residency than a Indian medical graduate because Indian medical schools don't teach towards the USMLE like Carib schools do.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Most of the physicans I know, whether MD or DO, realize that America is not producing enough doctors, even WITH DO schools, to fill the need we have. So what do we do? Steal MD's from countries like India, where they are desperately needed by their own country in spite of the fact they never had to face an MCAT test. Why should someone be willing to be treated by an MD from a different country with NO MCATS instead of being treated by an American physician who came in the top half of those who took the test? It's irrational, but so are some MD's.

I think you're overstating the case.

We are not "stealing" physicians from India. They come here because we offer a better quality of life, because they have family here, or for many other reasons. You can make the case that we shouldn't accept physicians from abroad but this country was built on the foundation of civil liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That doesn't extend just to those born here.

Secondly, the MCAT is hardly a measure of who is qualified to be a physician. It might seem like it as a pre-med but many countries outside the US have entry examinations, including the Indian medical schools. Many of the Indian medical schools are quite rigorous and you will find grads from them are highly intelligent and skilled physicians. Once you're in medical school, you'll see that no one cares about your MCATs; it becomes all about licensing examinations. If you're going to make it about "scores", you need to understand that many FMGs *are* in the top half o those taking the licensing examinations (ignoring the argument that they have longer to study, for the moment).

Lastly, it has not been convincingly argued that America isn't producing enough physicians; it has been argued that we do not have a doctor shortage, but rather a distribution problem. But that's an argument for another thread.

 

[mehc012]

I don't want to apply DO because the current match setup, with separate timings and separate licensing exams for both systems, seems like an unnecessarily stressful system which would be more difficult to navigate for the ideal result than just the ACGME match, especially if you want one of the (admittedly shrinking) number of residencies which is not well represented within the AOA system. Furthermore, the AOA, from what I've seen of their actions, seems like a really, really annoying society to have to work with - valid or not, the impression to me is that they do not advocate for their members half as well as they advocate for their own wallets.

I'd rather put in the extra work now (because yes, it is harder to match most MD schools, though that by itself does not necessarily say much about the two) than later, at the more critical junction of my career. And yes, there is some lingering stigma, and I would rather avoid that as well, even if it is unfounded.

 

[VanEman]

I think you're overstating the case.

We are not "stealing" physicians from India. They come here because we offer a better quality of life, because they have family here, or for many other reasons. You can make the case that we shouldn't accept physicians from abroad but this country was built on the foundation of civil liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That doesn't extend just to those born here.

Secondly, the MCAT is hardly a measure of who is qualified to be a physician. It might seem like it as a pre-med but many countries outside the US have entry examinations, including the Indian medical schools. Many of the Indian medical schools are quite rigorous and you will find grads from them are highly intelligent and skilled physicians. Once you're in medical school, you'll see that no one cares about your MCATs; it becomes all about licensing examinations. If you're going to make it about "scores", you need to understand that many FMGs *are* in the top half o those taking the licensing examinations (ignoring the argument that they have longer to study, for the moment).

Lastly, it has not been convincingly argued that America isn't producing enough physicians; it has been argued that we do not have a doctor shortage, but rather a distribution problem. But that's an argument for another thread.

We are actually in violent agreement. The best indictor of success in medical school is science grades. Why do we make people spend so much money and time on a test that is a poor predictor, at best, of success as a doctor. Other smarter foreign countries do without it quite successfully (look at Europe! and Australia!) and we could as well. Differentiating among our physicians based on who scored at the 85% or 60% on a test that the rest of the world successfully does without is silly. Essays don't predict success, interviews don't predict success, clinical work doesn't predict success---why do we bother with them---they waste money and time. If medical schools really cared about science, they would be scientific about how they admit students and they are not. They let emotion and tradition rule the day, and throw meaningless hurdles in the way of qualified applicants.

 

[lmn]

Most of the physicans I know, whether MD or DO, realize that America is not producing enough doctors, even WITH DO schools, to fill the need we have. So what do we do? Steal MD's from countries like India, where they are desperately needed by their own country in spite of the fact they never had to face an MCAT test. Why should someone be willing to be treated by an MD from a different country with NO MCATS instead of being treated by an American physician who came in the top half of those who took the test? It's irrational, but so are some MD's.

Wow this is so off in so many ways...

Also you should stop trying to pretend the mcat is some end all test. The mcat is nothing compared to medical school, and if you ask people who have taken step 1 how "hard" the mcat was in comparison you'll find out how much a joke the mcat is compared to usmle's. Stop trying to say that these FMG's aren't qualified simply because they haven't taken the MCAT, there are plenty of FMG's that are plenty smart to outcompete a good portion of our US grads.

 

[Winged Scapula]

We are actually in violent agreement. The best indictor of success in medical school is science grades. Why do we make people spend so much money and time on a test that is a poor predictor, at best, of success as a doctor. Other smarter foreign countries do without it quite successfully (look at Europe! and Australia!) and we could as well. Differentiating among our physicians based on who scored at the 85% or 60% on a test that the rest of the world successfully does without is silly. Essays don't predict success, interviews don't predict success, clinical work doesn't predict success---why do we bother with them---they waste money and time. If medical schools really cared about science, they would be scientific about how they admit students and they are not. They let emotion and tradition rule the day, and throw meaningless hurdles in the way of qualified applicants.

"Violent agreement"? LOL. Ok.

You were talking about who is going to be a better physician; I didn't think we were talking about success as a medical student. I agree that medical school does not predict success as a physician. MCATs and science grades do predict success in medical school, just as USMLEs predict success in passing board exams. None of these things are the best measure of being a good clinician but they're the best we've got at this point.

BTW, Australia does require an entrance exam; its called the GAMSAT. It was only 15 years ago they started requiring an interview for admission to medical school; prior to that it was based solely on grades and exam scores. There was quite a scuff up when the daughter of the Dean of one of the medical schools was denied admission despite her "perfect" stats. Reportedly she was sort of a social misfit and didn't interview well.

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

Sigh. Skip why did u start this thread.

 

[Dral]

This dead horse has been beaten so much, it has disintegrated into its subatomic particles.

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

This dead horse has been beaten so much, it has disintegrated into its subatomic particles.

Yep. Everyone has to make a decision that is best for them and move on. Enough with these threads.

 

[Greenberg702]

We are actually in violent agreement. The best indictor of success in medical school is science grades. Why do we make people spend so much money and time on a test that is a poor predictor, at best, of success as a doctor. Other smarter foreign countries do without it quite successfully (look at Europe! and Australia!) and we could as well. Differentiating among our physicians based on who scored at the 85% or 60% on a test that the rest of the world successfully does without is silly. Essays don't predict success, interviews don't predict success, clinical work doesn't predict success---why do we bother with them---they waste money and time. If medical schools really cared about science, they would be scientific about how they admit students and they are not. They let emotion and tradition rule the day, and throw meaningless hurdles in the way of qualified applicants.

The MCAT serves as the great equalizer between undergraduate schools just like the SAT serves as the equalizer between high schools. Personally, I think it's a good thing because nobody, and I mean nobody will believe that a 3.9 from podunk community college is equivalent to a 3.8 from Cornell unless you've got the 38 to back it up. The MCAT gives students who may have had to (for financial reasons or otherwise) attend lower ranked schools a chance to shine. A 3.9 and 39 from Kansas State can now be more competitive academically than a 3.8 and 32 from Cornell. Do you know who attended top colleges before the implementation of the SAT? Students from Andover, Exeter, etc. Personally, I prefer something that at least resembles a meritocracy.

Also, pre meds in Europe absolutely take standardized tests for medical school admissions and often have to do very well. Look up the admission requirements and see for yourself.

 

[VanEman]

The MCAT serves as the great equalizer between undergraduate schools just like the SAT serves as the equalizer between high schools. Personally, I think it's a good thing because nobody, and I mean nobody will believe that a 3.9 from podunk community college is equivalent to a 3.8 from Cornell unless you've got the 38 to back it up. The MCAT gives students who may have had to (for financial reasons or otherwise) attend lower ranked schools a chance to shine. A 3.9 and 39 from Kansas State can now be more competitive academically than a 3.8 and 32 from Cornell. Do you know who attended top colleges before the implementation of the SAT? Students from Andover, Exeter, etc. Personally, I prefer something that at least resembles a meritocracy.

Also, pre meds in Europe absolutely take standardized tests for medical school admissions and often have to do very well. Look up the admission requirements and see for yourself.

Baloney. Doing well on the SAT's and doing well on the MCAT proves you're good at taking standardized multiple choice tests. A nice predictor of some things up to a point. Once you've reached a certain threshold, it predicts nothing other than further standardized, multiple choice test-taking ability. What's the very best predictor of medical school success? Science GPA. Even that doesn't necessary predict who will become the best physicians.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

This dead horse has been beaten so much, it has disintegrated into its subatomic particles.

If anything, these threads are worth browsing for comments like this.

 

[Greenberg702]

Baloney. Doing well on the SAT's and doing well on the MCAT proves you're good at taking standardized multiple choice tests. A nice predictor of some things up to a point. Once you've reached a certain threshold, it predicts nothing other than further standardized, multiple choice test-taking ability. What's the very best predictor of medical school success? Science GPA. Even that doesn't necessary predict who will become the best physicians.

Yeah and I'm telling you that science GPAs are not viewed equally across schools. A 4.0 sGPA at one school may signify a much different and even lower level of preparation than a 3.8 at another. Are you going to argue that a 3.8 at CalTech is viewed the same/demonstrates the same thing as a 3.8 at NC State? With the wildly differing standards among colleges in the US, medical schools need a common standard by which to evaluate students. Is the MCAT the perfect predictor of medical school performance? Of course not. But without it, adcoms will have to guess and make assumptions about the caliber of your school and I don't think most applicants would welcome that.

 

[VanEman]

Yeah and I'm telling you that science GPAs are not viewed equally across schools. A 4.0 sGPA at one school may signify a much different and even lower level of preparation than a 3.8 at another. Are you going to argue that a 3.8 at CalTech is viewed the same/demonstrates the same thing as a 3.8 at NC State? With the wildly differing standards among colleges in the US, medical schools need a common standard by which to evaluate students. Is the MCAT the perfect predictor of medical school performance? Of course not. But without it, adcoms will have to guess and make assumptions about the caliber of your school and I don't think most applicants would welcome that.

I know they're not looked at equally across all schools. I'm arguing that schools are incompetent at using the tools they have. So don't tell me what schools do, when I think they're incompetent to begin with. Telling me the stupid things they do with numbers in pursuit of a better class is just adding fuel to the fire. If they care about test-taking ability, they should just look at your SAT or ACT numbers. Why make you go through more test-taking? Just to make more money for the test providers?

 

[Shinobiz11]

. While threads like this almost always conjure up at least one "I'm doing DO rather than MD because I like the philosophy," the reality is that I have yet to come across someone who could've gotten into an MD school yet chose to go DO. That just doesn't exist in my world.
.

I believe @johnamo turned down CMU and WMed for MSUCOM, based on reputation. It happens.

 

[mvenus929]

I didn't apply DO because it was a separate application system, and I wanted to go to a specific residency program that I knew did not look favorably at DOs (I ended up not going to that program, but details...). One of my close friends from college had the opposite mindset and is applying for residency now. As a premed, I'd look closely at all the schools I was applying to to see how their clinical years are set up. Many DO schools will send you to the other side of the country for rotations, which may or may not be a good thing.

I have residency classmates who have a DO degree, and I honestly don't remember until I look at the roster, or they make some comment about it. It's a nonissue at this point.

 

[darklabel]

It's undeniable that the field of osteopathic medicine has had a huge boom in growth over the past 20 years. In the process, the admissions standards and reputation of D.O schools have gone up as well. For example, Midwestern-AZ, a D.O school, is not interviewing anyone with a MCAT score below 29 at this time in the app cycle. Compare that to MD schools like Meharry, University of New Mexico, University of West Virginia, Ponce etc who accept people with MCAT scores between 23-26. Just one example.

Even the New York Times agrees that "D.O is In Now" published in July 29 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/e...athic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?_r=0

I'm not trying to compare M.Ds and D.Os but I'm tired of pre-meds knocking down D.O and considering it to be easy to get into a D.O program. That may have been the case even 10 years ago but it's not true now. D.Os are becoming mainstream and are equal to M.Ds.

You do realize that there are numerous premeds who would love to go to those MD schools and have great stats but they get rejected right? Those schools follow specific missions that recruit people from their home state, URM, strong volunteerism (not typical premed stuff either), strong cultural connections, etc so their "true" pool of applicants is lower. Not every school aims for top 30.

The whole DO vs. MD thing is played out. Have a great friend that is in DO school and he studies the same curriculum I do pre-clinicals (Besides OMM, he hates that class, but whatever). I don't see his school as inferior at all and think DO schools are great and almost gladly went to one. Also the hierarchy thing isn't limited to MD and DO. Top MD schools crap on lower tier and the top schools crap on each other so you just have to say "screw it" and do whatever is best for yourself and future ambitions. Besides, if DO didn't exist then residency positions would just fill up with IMGs.

 

[DermViser]

It's undeniable that the field of osteopathic medicine has had a huge boom in growth over the past 20 years. In the process, the admissions standards and reputation of D.O schools have gone up as well. For example, Midwestern-AZ, a D.O school, is not interviewing anyone with a MCAT score below 29 at this time in the app cycle. Compare that to MD schools like Meharry, University of New Mexico, University of West Virginia, Ponce etc who accept people with MCAT scores between 23-26. Just one example.

Even the New York Times agrees that "D.O is In Now" published in July 29 2014.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?_r=0

I'm not trying to compare M.Ds and D.Os but I'm tired of pre-meds knocking down D.O and considering it to be easy to get into a D.O program. That may have been the case even 10 years ago but it's not true now. D.Os are becoming mainstream and are equal to M.Ds.

You'll be getting the ban hammer quite soon. Sad part is you'll think it's bc you being a D.O. most likely.

 

[DermViser]

You go DO if you didn't get MD. If you don't get DO either, you go Caribbean. It's as simple as that.

Prepare for the millenial hurt feelings backlash.

 

[DermViser]

I actually discussed this with a mentor of mine, and his response was somewhat surprising to me. He's not a fan of DO programs; from his perspective, he sees it as diluting the qualifications of physicians and giving people an opportunity to become physicians that perhaps shouldn't really be doing so. He cites the mean GPA and MCAT differences between the two as his example. While threads like this almost always conjure up at least one "I'm doing DO rather than MD because I like the philosophy," the reality is that I have yet to come across someone who could've gotten into an MD school yet chose to go DO. That just doesn't exist in my world.

Why were you surprised at his response? It's perfectly logical. There are very few metrics that medical schools can use to evaluate applicants. GPA and MCAT are 2 of them. No metric is perfect. The truth is that if you didn't do so hot in undergrad, you're not likely to do as well in med school where sometimes even the best students in undergrad are at the point of hoping to pass a course in med school (basic science). For all the complaining that premeds do, they don't offer any real alternatives for med schools to look at.

Every single DO I have met didn't go to DO school bc they wanted to. Going to DO school was their last chance to go to med school in the United States. You have to take the roses and thorns of the DO pathway, and you can't complain about getting pricked by the thorn which you knew about in the beginning.

No amount of good media press by the NY Times (which is notoriously irresponsible in its reporting when it comes to medical education issues when it comes to giving the full story - see their Carribean medical school article) will change that and neither will COCA granting more DO schools to be built no matter how bad in quality their MS-3 rotations will be.

 

[DermViser]

As someone who has worked with both kinds of residents, and shadowed both kinds of physicians they are identical in practice.

No one denies that. They both get a medical license, the minimum requirement to practice.

 

[Osteoth]

Just seems like a lower potential degree, both economically and in the greater scope of career and life.

Though interesting that Congressman Joe Heck of Nevada is a DO, although the emphasis of the stigma is noted in the fact he was even designated as a DO on a list of physicians in Congress

 

[DermViser]

Most of the physicans I know, whether MD or DO, realize that America is not producing enough doctors, even WITH DO schools, to fill the need we have. So what do we do? Steal MD's from countries like India, where they are desperately needed by their own country in spite of the fact they never had to face an MCAT test. Why should someone be willing to be treated by an MD from a different country with NO MCATS instead of being treated by an American physician who came in the top half of those who took the test? It's irrational, but so are some MD's.

The MDs from countries like India want to practice here for a reason. They come here for a chance to build a better life for themselves and their families. Vinay Kumar is a pathologist at University of Chicago-Pritzker and is one of the authors of the Robbins textbook read by medical students across the country.

Their students take very difficult exams in order to make it to med school. Just bc they don't have the MCAT doesn't mean the people they take are ****ty. Many of these IMGs are top notch and would kick American med students behinds and many residencies would rather take them than a bottom of the barrel American medical student who feels entitled to a residency.

No one is STEALING anyone.

 

[DermViser]

I think you're overstating the case.

We are not "stealing" physicians from India. They come here because we offer a better quality of life, because they have family here, or for many other reasons. You can make the case that we shouldn't accept physicians from abroad but this country was built on the foundation of civil liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That doesn't extend just to those born here.

Secondly, the MCAT is hardly a measure of who is qualified to be a physician. It might seem like it as a pre-med but many countries outside the US have entry examinations, including the Indian medical schools. Many of the Indian medical schools are quite rigorous and you will find grads from them are highly intelligent and skilled physicians. Once you're in medical school, you'll see that no one cares about your MCATs; it becomes all about licensing examinations. If you're going to make it about "scores", you need to understand that many FMGs *are* in the top half o those taking the licensing examinations (ignoring the argument that they have longer to study, for the moment).

Lastly, it has not been convincingly argued that America isn't producing enough physicians; it has been argued that we do not have a doctor shortage, but rather a distribution problem. But that's an argument for another thread.

Jinx!

 

[WillburCobb]

You'll be getting the ban hammer quite soon. Sad part is you'll think it's bc you being a D.O. most likely.

OP claims to be a grad from Windsor in the Carib...

 

[EMDO2018]

Prepare for the millenial hurt feelings backlash.

So derm, you aren't a millennial? How old are you? I thought you were 26.

 

[SkipJunior]

OP claims to be a grad from Windsor in the Carib...

I never stated otherwise.

 

[DermViser]

We are actually in violent agreement. The best indictor of success in medical school is science grades. Why do we make people spend so much money and time on a test that is a poor predictor, at best, of success as a doctor. Other smarter foreign countries do without it quite successfully (look at Europe! and Australia!) and we could as well. Differentiating among our physicians based on who scored at the 85% or 60% on a test that the rest of the world successfully does without is silly. Essays don't predict success, interviews don't predict success, clinical work doesn't predict success---why do we bother with them---they waste money and time. If medical schools really cared about science, they would be scientific about how they admit students and they are not. They let emotion and tradition rule the day, and throw meaningless hurdles in the way of qualified applicants.

"violent agreement"? I've never heard that expression before.

The MCAT is a standardization metric. It's there for a reason - bc as all SDNers know, GPAs can be gamed by going to an easy school, taking easy classes, etc. Medical schools aren't stupid. The medical school curriculum is rigorous and they only want the best. That's why they recruit accordingly and don't want someone who scored at the 60th percentile.

If you think medicine and medical practice is basic on scientific inputs and those 100% predict success in medicine then you are wrong. There is a good reason there is holistic review of not just academics and test scores, but what you've done. Nothing "predicts" success. That's part of the problem.

 

[IslandStyle808]

OP claims to be a grad from Windsor in the Carib...

Derm's aware of that

 

[WillburCobb]

Derm's aware of that

His post suggests otherwise.

 

[DermViser]

So derm, you aren't a millennial? How old are you? I thought you were 26.

Yes, I am a millenial, as are you. The backlash isn't coming from me though, as I also realize what characteristics have hurt us as a generation.

It's well known that millenials don't like their feelings being hurt. They are not able to take criticism very well. It's why medical schools are now going back and modifying student assessment bc they realize they have to teach differently to millenials and the AAMC has identified this: https://www.aamc.org/download/283608/data/minor-communcatingeffectively.pdf

 

[DermViser]

Derm's aware of that

His post suggests otherwise.

Sorry, I didn't realize that the OP is a graduate of Windsor Medical School, which makes his OP even more confusing (since he isn't a DO).

http://www.tampabay.com/news/busine...medicine-produces-profits-few-doctors/1069719

It's also even more of a reason he should get the ban hammer.

 

[IslandStyle808]

Sorry, I didn't realize that the OP is a graduate of Windsor Medical School, which makes his OP even more confusing (since he isn't a DO).

http://www.tampabay.com/news/busine...medicine-produces-profits-few-doctors/1069719

It's also even more of a reason he should get the ban hammer.

That actually surprised me... you gave him advice on a pervious thread.

 

[DermViser]

I know someone who got into MD and DO and chose the DO simply on location. He didn't want to be stuck in a bad part of the state when he could be in Indy. The new DO school is working closely with our state med school anyway (same anatomy professors, etc) so he thought he would be better off. As of now he is happy. We shall see when the first MS3 rotations happen next year.

Isn't Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis?