What does everyone think of...

[PassingDays11]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

this hypothetical:

Let's say that allopathic and osteopathic medicine eventually merge into practically identical entities (assume they aren't already for all of you already chomping at the bit 😉 ). Would it be unreasonable for osteopathic schools to continue for the sole purpose of making competent doctors out of "non-traditional" students? Could that be the true identity of osteopathy?

By non-traditional I mean people who truly desire to become physicians and have had valuable life experiences but come up a little short in terms of GPA and MCAT scores.

I believe that osteopathic medicine has a lot to offer but the concern is real that allopathy and osteopathy are becoming very similar and past differences are becoming more and more difficult to distinguish.

I would simply like to hear other's feelings on this. Thanks.

 

[DrJekyl]

Osteopathic physicians spent decades proving they were equivalent to allopaths. In the process DOs lost some of their identity. Instead of merging, DOs need to start showing why their philosphy towards medicine is different. Though I agree there are osteopathic students who saw osteopathy as an alternative after unsuccessfully applying to allopathic schools, there are also osteopathic students who have chosen to attend a DO school over an MD school. Osteopathic students can take the same medical boards as allopathic students, and their basic science education is virtually identical. However, their philosphy towards medicine is different.

 

[DoctorMom78]

I am a "non-traditional" student: Married, 28, and the mother of 4 children. My MCAT scores and GPA are not as high as I would like them to be, but this is largely due to distractions in my personal life (my children) and not due to my actual ability. It is my life experiences that have helped create my desire to practice medicine and I truly want to practice in an underserved area where I will be of most benefit.
I think that the philosophy of osteopathic medicine is wonderful and the beliefs are close to my own. I agree that there is almost no differentiation between praciticing DOs and MDs and it is unfortunate that the foundations and principles that created osteopathic medicine are being lost. However, because osteopathic medicine looks at the "whole person" and has lower mean GPA and MCAT scores, I may get the opportunity to become a doctor afterall. I think that there are a lot of people in my situation who will become wonderful and competent doctors someday, but if it were not for osteopathic schools many of these people might not ever be able to attend medical school. There really is so much more to a person than MCAT scores and GPA and thankfully osteopathic schools realize this. If this is to become the true identity of osteopathic medicine, then I feel that it is a honorable one. Hopefully, some of the practices that help distinguish DOs from MDs can be retained.

 

[Kuba]

DOs and MDs wont converge without a huge fight from the osteopathic side since the AOA would become obsolete if this were to happen.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

this hypothetical:

Let's say that allopathic and osteopathic medicine eventually merge into practically identical entities (assume they aren't already for all of you already chomping at the bit 😉 ). Would it be unreasonable for osteopathic schools to continue for the sole purpose of making competent doctors out of "non-traditional" students? Could that be the true identity of osteopathy?

By non-traditional I mean people who truly desire to become physicians and have had valuable life experiences but come up a little short in terms of GPA and MCAT scores.

I believe that osteopathic medicine has a lot to offer but the concern is real that allopathy and osteopathy are becoming very similar and past differences are becoming more and more difficult to distinguish.

I would simply like to hear other's feelings on this. Thanks.

Horrible idea, for a number of reasons. As you allready mentioned, the 2 fields are already rather similar. The "true identity" of osteopathy, or any other form of medicine, is not defined by the type of students that enter the school, it is defined by the style of medicine that is taught and practiced.

Osteopathic schools are already more accepting of the 'non-traditional' student and seem to be more forgiving of GPA/MCAT problems. However, if what you are implying is that osteopathic admissions should focus on life / career experience and devalue academics, then I completly disagree. Life experience does not necesserily mean that you can handle the rigors of medical school, and while having a career will prob make you a better phyician, its not going to help you memorize anatomy.

Im not saying that MCAT / grades are the best indicators of a good physician, but they do a fairly good job of predicting board scores (USMLE or COMLEX) for the masses, which you have to pass in order to become a doctor. At some point, there has to be a standard criteria to judge applicants to medical school, and it can't be somthing as subjective as life experiences.

 

[Toohotinvegas33]

I guarantee (sp?) that if osteopathic school gave out an (MD) instead of (DO), but still called themself an osteopathic medical school, the majority of students would apply to both.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

Then they would not be osteopathic schools, they would be allopathic schools.

 

[PassingDays11]

Horrible idea, for a number of reasons. As you allready mentioned, the 2 fields are already rather similar. The "true identity" of osteopathy, or any other form of medicine, is not defined by the type of students that enter the school, it is defined by the style of medicine that is taught and practiced.

Osteopathic schools are already more accepting of the 'non-traditional' student and seem to be more forgiving of GPA/MCAT problems. However, if what you are implying is that osteopathic admissions should focus on life / career experience and devalue academics, then I completly disagree. Life experience does not necesserily mean that you can handle the rigors of medical school, and while having a career will prob make you a better phyician, its not going to help you memorize anatomy.

Im not saying that MCAT / grades are the best indicators of a good physician, but they do a fairly good job of predicting board scores (USMLE or COMLEX) for the masses, which you have to pass in order to become a doctor. At some point, there has to be a standard criteria to judge applicants to medical school, and it can't be somthing as subjective as life experiences.

I don't agree that an identity has to be composed of only style and type of medicine that is practiced. Identity concerns every aspect of the institution, including admissions. Medicaid's identity is not simply to provide health care, it is to provide health care for those who cannot reasonably provide it by their own means. Maybe not the best example but I hope you get my point.

I don't wish that this indeed happens, but my question was:
if osteopathic medicine is different from allopathic medicine, at some future point in time, will the practice of educating individuals who are not as "numerically apt" but have valuable experiences be worthwhile and considerable enough to sustain a different branch of medicine (i.e. osteopathy)?

I was not suggesting that life experiences replace academic success indicators entirely. We all understand that some minimal standards must be set. We also know that osteopathic schools' standards ARE lower, in terms of GPA and MCAT requirements, as a whole. My question was put forth to get others' opinions about the validity of osteopathy existing if only the above difference existed. If you would like to discuss another topic, please start a new thread.

 

[amathew]

Well that's interesting if you consider there are several allopathic schools who have DO's create a program for their school which resembles osteopathic medicine. New jersey medical school is one of those schools, who have started their "Physician's Core" as part of their curriculum, which was actually put in part by an osteopathic physician, based on osteopathic medicine due to NJMS's realization of the effectiveness of manipulative medicine. It's also havings its first years exposed to patients starting their first year, something that was unique to DO. So if there is any merging happening, its allopathic medical schools coming in terms with the holistic view of the human body and accepting it. And I agree with the 28 yr old mom (sorry I can't remember your username as i write this). But yes, DO schools are a TINY bit lenient on the applicants and take it into consideration that not all students can be weighed equally. It's sort of like the philosophy of osteopathic medicine you know...it considers that illness is not just biological but also effected by social, cultural and economic influences. Same concept applies to the applicant. You can't fully diagnose an applicant on the basis of grades...social, economic and cultural aspects are important, in this case the applicant's ECC. It's really sad that allopathic schools don't consider that. Oh well...

 

[Nickelpennykid]

I don't wish that this indeed happens, but my question was:
if osteopathic medicine is different from allopathic medicine, at some future point in time, will the practice of educating individuals who are not as "numerically apt" but have valuable experiences be worthwhile and considerable enough to sustain a different branch of medicine (i.e. osteopathy)?

I was not suggesting that life experiences replace academic success indicators entirely. We all understand that some minimal standards must be set. We also know that osteopathic schools' standards ARE lower, in terms of GPA and MCAT requirements, as a whole. My question was put forth to get others' opinions about the validity of osteopathy existing if only the above difference existed. If you would like to discuss another topic, please start a new thread.

I was not discussing another topic, I was adressing your origional obscure hypothetical. The answer is no, as I stated the first time. Students have to be both numerically apt and have life experience in medical settings.

 

[PassingDays11]

Nickelpenny - I don't believe that my original hypothetical was "obscure" as you say. The possibility is real as you can see in the post from amathew. Allopathy is recognizing the benefit of manipulative techniques for diagnosis and treatment more and more.

Amathew - Thanks for the concrete example. I knew that this sort if thing was happening but wasn't sure where and how.

 

[dtrain5]

I would argue that it is not the Osteopathic schools that have deviated from their "identities", but that allopathic schools are adopting a more holistic view of medicine. 😀

 

[Kuba]

You can't fully diagnose an applicant on the basis of grades...social, economic and cultural aspects are important, in this case the applicant's ECC. It's really sad that allopathic schools don't consider that. Oh well...

umm... allo schools do that too.. the truth is that osteo schools for the most part get a lot of applicants that could not get in to allo schools. They do not reject the 35 mcat 3.8 gpa applicant no matter what their EC's are, nor do they accept the 16 mcat 3.0 gpa applicant with incredible EC's. i dont think in reality they focus on EC's any more or less than allo schools. The reason the mcats and gpa are lower is because their applicant pool's gpa and mcats are lower, NOT because they do a better job of looking at the whole person. There is a difference of being proud to be a DO/applying to DO and being delusional. At some point we have to realize that although there are some huge advantages of being a DO and a lot of people choose this route regardless of where they can get in, for most people it is a back up plan. For both osteo and allo schools, academics is still way above EC's.

 

[Kuba]

sorry the above post barely makes sense. I dont have the energy to proofread

 

[jkhamlin]

I would argue that it is not the Osteopathic schools that have deviated from their "identities", but that allopathic schools are adopting a more holistic view of medicine. 😀

Exactly! I think that eventually the AMA will become obsolete and will be absorbed into the AOA. In the future, the MD programs will give out only DO degrees. 😛

 

[Nickelpennykid]

Nickelpenny - I don't believe that my original hypothetical was "obscure" as you say. The possibility is real as you can see in the post from amathew. Allopathy is recognizing the benefit of manipulative techniques for diagnosis and treatment more and more.

Amathew - Thanks for the concrete example. I knew that this sort if thing was happening but wasn't sure where and how.

At the same time you say allopathy is recognizing OMM, a large portion of the MD population criticizes OMM for not being evidence based medicine and while some DO schools are currently engaged in reasearch to quanitfy the benifits of OMM, at this point in time there is still a great deal of debate. I say this as a person applying only to DO schools with a family full of osteopathic physicians who believes in the benifits of OMM. Go look at the residency boards or any of the medical student boards and you will see the OMM debate come up all the time. Sure, some MD's have a genuine interest in it, but many don't see it as a valuable resource.

You cannot honostly believe that because one allo school adopted a sort of DO structure that the entire MD community is going to jump over to the DO ship and start embracing all of the things that make osteopathy unique. The "holistic" approach to medicine is a great word to put on a poster advertisment for osteopathy, but in reality, what primary care physican lacks the ability to take the "entire person" into consideration.

 

[Kuba]

The "holistic" approach to medicine is a great word to put on a poster advertisment for osteopathy, but in reality, what primary care physican lacks the ability to take the "entire person" into consideration.

👍

 

[PassingDays11]

At the same time you say allopathy is recognizing OMM, a large portion of the MD population criticizes OMM for not being evidence based medicine and while some DO schools are currently engaged in reasearch to quanitfy the benifits of OMM, at this point in time there is still a great deal of debate. I say this as a person applying only to DO schools with a family full of osteopathic physicians who believes in the benifits of OMM. Go look at the residency boards or any of the medical student boards and you will see the OMM debate come up all the time. Sure, some MD's have a genuine interest in it, but many don't see it as a valuable resource.

You cannot honostly believe that because one allo school adopted a sort of DO structure that the entire MD community is going to jump over to the DO ship and start embracing all of the things that make osteopathy unique. The "holistic" approach to medicine is a great word to put on a poster advertisment for osteopathy, but in reality, what primary care physican lacks the ability to take the "entire person" into consideration.

Whoa! I don't think I ever said anything about osteopathic medicine being more holistic than allopathic medicine. And no I don't believe that allopathy is going to embrace everything that makes osteopathy unique. I suggested an eventual merging of philosophies - didn't suggest one in particular would dominate.

Yes, there will always be those unhappy with the current state of things, but that's impossible to stop. I agree that more research is needed before the medical community can confidently accept manipulative techniques as an effective treatment modality, but there have been a few positive studies already (manipulation reduced medicine required and recovery time - not amazing, but seemed beneficial). I was speaking of more acceptance at the administrative level. This could have a trickle down effect and influence other programs.

 

[Nickelpennykid]

Whoa! I don't think I ever said anything about osteopathic medicine being more holistic than allopathic medicine. And no I don't believe that allopathy is going to embrace everything that makes osteopathy unique. I suggested an eventual merging of philosophies - didn't suggest one in particular would dominate.

Yes, there will always be those unhappy with the current state of things, but that's impossible to stop. I agree that more research is needed before the medical community can confidently accept manipulative techniques as an effective treatment modality, but there have been a few positive studies already (manipulation reduced medicine required and recovery time - not amazing, but seemed beneficial). I was speaking of more acceptance at the administrative level. This could have a trickle down effect and influence other programs.

I'm not sure where you are going with this, but think of it this way. The only way we are going to see a merging of philisophies is if DO's decide to be absorbed by MD's, which would be both highly unlikely and unfourtinate. There is a zero percent chance that MD's will ever completly embrace DO philisophy. They have allready attempted to rid the US of DO's in California and a few other places in the past. Yes, things have imporved recently and the two groups are learning to play nice a little better, and the future could see some more acceptance on an administratve level, but as long as there are more MD's than DO' there will never be a merging of philisophies. This is a good thing. We see monopolies as negaitve entities on every other level...medicine should be no different.